‘Blair’s babies’ even more rightwing than ‘Thatcher’s children’ Watch

ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
"British young people are more rightwing and authoritarian in their views than preceding generations, according to research that contradicts the widely held view that younger people tend to be more progressive."

https://www.ft.com/content/8352aa06-...c-082c54a7f539



****
0
reply
Therec00
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
What about Brown's Boys ?
1
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Right, then throw in that it's almost certainly comparing like for like, so say Blairs babies at 21 and Thatcher's children at 21 rather than Blair's babies now and Thatcher's children now and both statements are true, the older people are more authoritarian and right wing, but the younger generation are more right wing and authoritarian than they parents were AT THE SAME AGE. It nicely shows the other common thought that society progresses towards the right. The young are still more lefty liberal than their parents, but society as a whole is shifting right.
0
reply
Ladbants
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
I do see some truth in this
1
reply
Bang Outta Order
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by Therec00)
What about Brown's Boys ?
:toofunny:
0
reply
username1221160
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
They are also far more obese. Is there a link? I can certainly see one with our love of consumerism.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Right, then throw in that it's almost certainly comparing like for like, so say Blairs babies at 21 and Thatcher's children at 21 rather than Blair's babies now and Thatcher's children now and both statements are true, the older people are more authoritarian and right wing, but the younger generation are more right wing and authoritarian than they parents were AT THE SAME AGE. It nicely shows the other common thought that society progresses towards the right. The young are still more lefty liberal than their parents, but society as a whole is shifting right.
Politics goes in cycles. Always has done, always will do.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by Bornblue)
Politics goes in cycles. Always has done, always will do.
So when was this leftward trend, and the rightward one before it, and the leftward one before that? Cycling governments is not the same as cycling underlying national ideology.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
So when was this leftward trend, and the rightward one before it, and the leftward one before that? Cycling governments is not the same as cycling underlying national ideology.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Often governments reflect it.

1940s on wards certainly a left wing economic trend, people more keen on welfare state and nationalised industries. 70s started the reverse trend. Now the trend seems to combine the two with nationalist, protectionist states.

Almost seems like the compromise is a free market within a state but not outside.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
So when was this leftward trend, and the rightward one before it, and the leftward one before that? Cycling governments is not the same as cycling underlying national ideology.

Posted from TSR Mobile
1943-1950 leftward

1950-1960 rightward

1960-1970 leftward

1970-1994 rightward

1994-2008 leftward

2008- rightward

Its not difficult
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by nulli tertius)
1943-1950 leftward

1950-1960 rightward

1960-1970 leftward

1970-1994 rightward

1994-2008 leftward

2008- rightward

Its not difficult
Not sure about that. It would be easy to argue that new labour marked a term rightward just under different custodians. New Labour essentially borrowed Ken Clarkes economic policies with progressivism at home and neoconservatism abroad.
0
reply
username1675443
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
Please someone explain left and right to me. Extreme left is Communism and extreme right Fascism? But it's more like a circle that bleeds into one another??

I get so confused
0
reply
jape
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by gwaggy)
Please someone explain left and right to me. Extreme left is Communism and extreme right Fascism? But it's more like a circle that bleeds into one another??

I get so confused
The terms are useless and they barely mean anything.
1
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by Davij038)
Not sure about that. It would be easy to argue that new labour marked a term rightward just under different custodians. New Labour essentially borrowed Ken Clarkes economic policies with progressivism at home and neoconservatism abroad.
New Labour was clearly to the left of Major's government and the country continued leftwards at a snail's pace as the Brownites gradually gained ascendency over the Blairites. The public mood only changes after Brown becomes PM.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by gwaggy)
Please someone explain left and right to me. Extreme left is Communism and extreme right Fascism? But it's more like a circle that bleeds into one another??

I get so confused
Left, inequality is avoidable and it is the role of the state to pull the top down and bottom up. Right, inequality I'd inherently good and/or unavoidable and it is not the role of the state to try to eliminate it.

The very very tl;Dr version

Also worth noting fascism is not the end of the right, it tends to be "third way" and centrist. The notable fascists are not particularly far to the right in the convention sense, despite the "far right" label. The extreme of the right would be objectivism or some other similar philosophy

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
mojojojo101
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Left, inequality is avoidable and it is the role of the state to pull the top down and bottom up. Right, inequality I'd inherently good and/or unavoidable and it is not the role of the state to try to eliminate it.

The very very tl;Dr version

Also worth noting fascism is not the end of the right, it tends to be "third way" and centrist. The notable fascists are not particularly far to the right in the convention sense, despite the "far right" label. The extreme of the right would be objectivism or some other similar philosophy

Posted from TSR Mobile
That's not a tldr definition, its a bad one. The particular role (ormlack thereof) of the State is disputed across the political spectrum.
0
reply
username2808800
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
What a load of garbage, really?
Blair stopped more grammar schools-LEFT WING
Blair overspent in the early years- LEFT WING
Blair spent money on public services- LEFT WING

He was still arguably a neoliberal though
0
reply
username2965904
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by Therec00)
What about Brown's Boys ?
They strike me as probably Sinn Fein voters. Not sure about Mrs Brown, who may vote Fine Gael.
0
reply
RedManc
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by fleky6910)
What a load of garbage, really?
Blair stopped more grammar schools-LEFT WING
Blair overspent in the early years- LEFT WING
Blair spent money on public services- LEFT WING

He was still arguably a neoliberal though
Blair didn't stop grammar schools, they stopped grammar schools in the 1960's.
Blair did not overspend in the early years.
Blair did spend a lot of money on public services.
0
reply
username2808800
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by RedManc)
Blair didn't stop grammar schools, they stopped grammar schools in the 1960's.
Blair did not overspend in the early years.
Blair did spend a lot of money on public services.
Urmm no , Blair passed a bill to stop the building of new grammars in 1998,
Yes he did, Blair and Brown inherited one of the best economies ever. They could have easily maintained a surplus and spent it away in an economic boom. They ran a surplus for a short while but spent it away.
Again you show your lack of knowledge.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (274)
66.18%
No (140)
33.82%

Watched Threads

View All