Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Only if it was implemented with meritocratic ideals.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    As Mark Corrigan once wisely said: "It's only through the miracle of consumer capitalism that you're not lying in your own ****; dying at 43 with rotten teeth"
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If by "support" you mean helping to give a good old ass kicking to anyone attempting to (illegally) overthrow the government, then yes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jaager)
    Why do we have to subordinate our lives to the needs of the economy?
    Well if you want sh*t living standards then you can sacrifice your economy. Britain's quality of living was awful 1950 - 1980s, Socialism has been tried and tried and tried - and it has failed and failed and failed. Although the Kibbutzim in Israel were pretty popular - but even those are dying out in the face of Capitalism and Capitalist benefits.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    I never said I supported Franco at all.

    I was just responding to her and the fact that she has some mystical worship of the Spanish anarchists that is so typical of Chomsky and other leftist radicals.
    It's the way you phrase your responses. You do have a pro-church agenda, which in the Spanish case effectively meant support for the anti-Republican forces. Whether you support Franco or not is, quite rightly, irrelevant but to claim that the socialists or republicans were worse than the Nationalists in the conflict is absurd and sickeningly wrong historically. The Nationalists killed more than the Republicans did. The mass graves across the republican areas attest to that.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    Well if you want sh*t living standards then you can sacrifice your economy. Britain's quality of living was awful 1950 - 1980s, Socialism has been tried and tried and tried - and it has failed and failed and failed. Although the Kibbutzim in Israel were pretty popular - but even those are dying out in the face of Capitalism and Capitalist benefits.
    So, you mean it was awful in a period when you had a Conservative government from 1951 - 1964 and again from 1970 - 1974?

    Well damn, I must have missed something there...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Revolution? No as it would probably involve overthrowing a democratically elected government. If it was voted in, then yes.
    Democracy > Socialist Revolution.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    It's the way you phrase your responses. You do have a pro-church agenda, which in the Spanish case effectively meant support for the anti-Republican forces. Whether you support Franco or not is, quite rightly, irrelevant but to claim that the socialists or republicans were worse than the Nationalists in the conflict is absurd and sickeningly wrong historically. The Nationalists killed more than the Republicans did. The mass graves across the republican areas attest to that.
    I didn't claim that they were worse at all. There were mass murders on both sides.

    And I was arguing against the disgusting treatment of pious by the hands of the Republicans. Not all clergy were pro-Nationalist, in fact the policy of the Vatican was one of neutrality. They were many Christian republicans especially in the Basque and Catalan regions of Spain.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    So, you mean it was awful in a period when you had a Conservative government from 1951 - 1964 and again from 1970 - 1974?

    Well damn, I must have missed something there...
    Well you did because they governed over a country with socialist structures embedded in the country's organization. It was not until Thatcher that the trade unions were finally broken, financial laws relaxed and Britain started prospering. Fact.

    Just because Labor is in power now does not mean that right now Britain is leaning towards socialism... Thinking that would just be ignorant. Therefore when the conservatives ruled during that time they did so within a culture of the WELFARE STATE.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    This is the sort of stuff that makes me see the virtue of a right to bear arms.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    And I was arguing against the disgusting treatment of pious by the hands of the Republicans. Not all clergy were pro-Nationalist, in fact the policy of the Vatican was one of neutrality.
    Yeah and I'm a pro-creationist Catholic. Vatican "neutrality" in that period is a load of rubbish, much like Vatican "neutrality" during WW2 is a load of rubbish.

    The historical revisionism on these forums astounds me sometimes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    Well you did because they governed over a country with socialist structures embedded in the country's organization. It was not until Thatcher that the trade unions were finally broken, financial laws relaxed and Britain started prospering. Fact.
    ********. Thatcher's "revolution" made a handful of people rich. The rest of the country languished in unemployment or economic hardship.

    (Original post by dn013)
    Just because Labor is in power now does not mean that right now Britain is leaning towards socialism... Thinking that would just be ignorant. Therefore when the conservatives ruled during that time they did so within a culture of the WELFARE STATE.
    Labo[u]r aren't in power now ... NEW Labour is in power right now and they are the (arguably more successful) continuation of Thatcherism only with a more welfarist sensibility.

    And if you believe that the Tories ruled within a culture of the WELFARE STATE, I urge you to read their policy statements from that period. They clearly were doing as much as they could to undermine the WELFARE STATE.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    You mean the war where anarchists, communists and other assorted radicals tortured and murdered innocent Spanish Christians (among others)?
    Lol.

    If you look at the context of the thread, I was responding to an individual who claimed that if a Fascist revolution was staged anarchists would join in (i.e. on the side of the fascists). This is nothing to do with which side I would support or who killed who. So with regards to:

    I was just responding to her and the fact that she has some mystical worship of the Spanish anarchists that is so typical of Chomsky and other leftist radicals.
    I know it's difficult, but try not to be so silly. This is about the simple question of whether anarchists would join in with Fascists if they "had a revolution".

    Unless you're here to tell me that the anarchists were on the side of the Fascists in the Spanish Civil war, piss off and stop wasting mine and everybody else's time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    ********. Thatcher's "revolution" made a handful of people rich. The rest of the country languished in unemployment or economic hardship.



    Labo[u]r aren't in power now ... NEW Labour is in power right now and they are the (arguably more successful) continuation of Thatcherism only with a more welfarist sensibility.

    And if you believe that the Tories ruled within a culture of the WELFARE STATE, I urge you to read their policy statements from that period. They clearly were doing as much as they could to undermine the WELFARE STATE.
    They might have been trying to undermine it but that in itself accepts the fact that were governing over a WELFARE STATE. Everybody knows that the welfare state in the UK was only abolished by Thatcher, and thank your lucky stars that she did abolish it.

    When you say 'they made a handful of people rich' you must be talking about a pretty f*cking big handful, one large enough to make the UK the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world? Not f*cking bad for a country that was so backwards that in the 1990s you had to buy electrical equipment separate from their plugs.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    Yeah and I'm a pro-creationist Catholic. Vatican "neutrality" in that period is a load of rubbish, much like Vatican "neutrality" during WW2 is a load of rubbish.

    The historical revisionism on these forums astounds me sometimes.
    No, it isn't at all. I would agree that the majority of Catholics were pro-Nationalist because of the anticlerical violence of the radical Republicans but the policy of the Vatican Church was clearly one of neutrality.

    And I'm not sure exactly what you're implying about the Catholic Church and WW2 but I'm pretty certain that it is something sinister.

    The bigotry and lies of radical leftists like yourself astounds me sometimes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    They might have been trying to undermine it but that in itself accepts the fact that were governing over a WELFARE STATE. Everybody knows that the welfare state in the UK was only abolished by Thatcher, and thank your lucky stars that she did abolish it.
    I assume that everyone has read the historical evidence? The Welfare state instituted by the Labour government in the 1945 - 51 administration underwent several modficiations both by the Tories in the years I cited and by Wilson and Callaghan. There were several motions to attempt to 'modernise' Britain in several ways all of which revised the welfare state that Attlee and his ministers instituted. The idea that Thatcher was some great hero who rescued Britain in its darkest hour is, I'm afraid to say, historical propaganda on her behalf. She and her followers forged the idea of the post-war consensus to enable her to claim that she was pushing Britain in a whole new direction. The fact is she wasn't. She merely had the power to put into practice what Enoch Powell had been arguing for a decade earlier.

    (Original post by dn013)
    When you say 'they made a handful of people rich' you must be talking about a pretty f*cking big handful, one large enough to make the UK the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world? Not f*cking bad for a country that was so backwards that in the 1990s you had to buy electrical equipment separate from their plugs.
    You sure about that? I'm pretty sure our (taiwanese-made) TV had a plug on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Zzzzzzzz more dribble from these crack-pot bearded nutters. I implore you to banish this mindset by the time you reach puberty!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    And I'm not sure exactly what you're implying about the Catholic Church and WW2 but I'm pretty certain that it is something sinister.

    The bigotry and lies of radical leftists like yourself astounds me sometimes.
    See, there's quite a lot of good history been done on the role of the Vatican in WW2 which suggests rather a lot of things to which the term "neutral" cannot be applied. Consider the arguments of Tony Judt for example.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dn013)
    They might have been trying to undermine it but that in itself accepts the fact that were governing over a WELFARE STATE. Everybody knows that the welfare state in the UK was only abolished by Thatcher, and thank your lucky stars that she did abolish it.

    When you say 'they made a handful of people rich' you must be talking about a pretty f*cking big handful, one large enough to make the UK the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world? Not f*cking bad for a country that was so backwards that in the 1990s you had to buy electrical equipment separate from their plugs.
    It was a top down approach, and this only really benefits the minority, despite making a country more economically powerful. Those figures are judged by the strength of our economic privileges and fail to take into account our economic hardships. So while she may have sorted big businesses out rather well, she plunged thousands of people into poverty. Those people probably couldn't care less how much of an international power Britain was economically because they suffered in poverty while the rich just got richer.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No. Socialism is the greatest evil that has ever afflicted this world.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.