[Closed] Aurevoir Sarkozy

trailmonkey

You've obviously seen me in the flesh - bugger - cover blown 😕

Still, I bet he shreds it downhill.

dislike all you like darcy - doesn't make it untrue 😉

I see Golden Dawn's anti-austerity policies came through as I expected in Greece!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/07/greece-election-farright-idUSL5E8G73PF20120507

But I suppose that takes us back to the dichotomous 'right wing' parties with 'left wing' economic policies thing again 😈

Well most of what you say is both dislikeable [i]and[/i] bollocks Zulu. I was only thinking the other day that I'd started to actually feel a bit sorry for you after reading some of your posts, they've been that weak lately. And hey, that's no state of affairs to be getting into is it? You need a break mate.

Kaesae, I wouldn't be persuaded by the hyperbole of today's headlines, including today's FT which should know better. Ok 24hour news will always sensationalise things, but there has been no violent financial crash overnight merely an utterly predictable weakening in the euro and in equity markets (Greek bank shares aside today). It's not a tax issue either certainly not in isolation. Recent news has included, weaker growth in most major economies, incumbent political parties taking a hit in various elections and growing arguments against the economic and political orthodoxy being enforced from Europe's core ie, lots of uncertainty. In the past 24 hours, two elections with the same central theme. A rejection of austerity and the terms of the latest euro fudge package. One is the sickest man of Europe, the other one if it's leading players who has vowed to take on Frau Merkel and "his enemies" in global finance. So all in all as predictable as the fact that we still have politicians implementing yesterday's solutions for tomorrow's problems. Plus ca change, rien n'a change!!!

You need a break mate

should clear me out a bit.

[img] [/img]

I take it you're cheering the success of socialists then Darcy? I mean, all socialism is good isn't it, even the National type...

*like*

Just before I'm caricatured as a blindly obedient Authority lapdog, I'd like to share an example of what I am on about from a ride yesterday in the Peaks.

As I was having a breather at the crossroads at Whinstone Lee Tor, there were quite a few walkers and riders about.

Then down from the top (on a footpath) tore a lad on a Nukeproof Mega - he was really nailing it and my initial reaction was 'cool', however, when he went on to jump past two middle aged women at waist height and fly off down another non-bridleway, the rational side of me kicked in.

I know that there a quality tracks that are not strictly legit to ride, and yes, I sometimes ride them myself. But it's the context of what this guy was doing - his actions could easily cause official complaints to be made - and have this particular track shut down or blocked or whatever. He shouldn't have done that on a Bank Holiday Sunday in full view of loads of people, no matter how cool he looked. The long-term ramification could be bad for all riders in the area - inidividuals need to exercise responsibility. I really hope it wasn't this bloke who had to have the Edale Mountain Rescue out - this publicity would not be good.

You don't have to be a stickler for all the rules, but you need to exercise some common sense - even on a bridleway, you can't go around terrorising people who have as much right to be there as you - simple really. Let's all rub along together for a change - obviously whilst stood to rigid attention and saluting. 🙂

Immigration should be limited to need and genuine refugees.

2) why would you allow refugees to immigrate when the only obligation is to provide safe harbour?

3) how would withdrawing from the EU's free labour movement provisions affect British citizens in the EU and British business's ability to hire/continue employing the employees it needs?

4) whose "need"?

ernie_lynch - Member

In 2007 there were 9 left wing governments within the 27 EU countries

So it's pretty clear who set the EU agenda then..........conservative governments. One has to wonder why the EU is in such an economic mess eh ?

Conservatism doesn't work, in case anyone hadn't noticed.

No it doesn't. That schematic just shows distribution of clearly left wing governments in Europe, over time, it has no indication at all of the strength or weakness of the governments in relation to party. What it does show is that just over 30% of governments were politically on the left, this does not necessarily mean that 70% were right wing. For example, this chart excludes Germany's "grand coalition" of 2005-09, comprising the centre-right Christian Democrats and the centre-left Social Democrats, one of the biggest and most influential economic engines of Europe.

Why is it that those who are dogmatically wedded to a political faith cannot look at facts without applying a liberal dose of left or right spin to them?

MF - I am with you all the way - stand as an independent, I'd vote for someone who can demonstrate original thought not a myopic party political rant. Just listened to the independent candidate for London Mayor on R4 this morning - she's brilliant. Perhaps more intelligent independent candidates is what we need?

Wunundred. 😀

What this thread needs is some ill-informed right wing opinion being posted.

Me? I'm of the opinion that all politicians are barstewards.

PJM1974 - Member

What this thread needs is some [b]more[/b] ill-informed right wing opinion being posted.

fixed it for you

teamhurtmore - Member

Well said mf, the RW v LW debate is more commonly a tired, outdated and sloppy attempt to classify people

Strange thing for you to say THM, the left-wing and right-wing classification is widely used by politicians and the media beyond STW, there is nothing "outdated" about it. Even your bible the FT, freely uses the terms - I'm surprised to hear you describe the FT as "sloppy".

The reality is that it's an excellent means of giving a concise and fairly accurate political analysis in just two words.

The only people who seem to have a problem with the terms are right-wingers such as yourself, who for obvious reasons don't want to admit to being right-wing. But left-wingers like me are perfectly happy to be labelled as such, even by the FT.

Indeed left-wingers often flaunt the fact that they are left-wing by including the term within their organisation's name. For example the party which came second in yesterday's election in Greece is called the Coalition of the Radical Left, and the candidate who came fourth in the French presidential election was from the Left Front.

Right-wingers in contrast, tend to be thoroughly ashamed of the fact that they are right-wing, preferring instead to claim that the term tired, outdated, and sloppy.

Unless of course they are American, in which case it is your patriotic duty to call yourself right-wing.

[img] [/img]

They have no shame.

Ernie, perhaps it's people who like to make black and white distinctions, or those whose main merit is simplicity rather than accuracy who like to use them. Journo's and STW posters being obvious examples. The Economist graph is an excellent example. How many of those parties followed exactly/ broadly the same econ policies over the periods shown?

Perhaps those who object to people classifying them merely know more about themselves than Internet posters who have never met them!

Plus I was referring to the RW v LW "debate" given that the debate between extremes of political and economic orthodoxy have been increasingly blurred. Even my bible (sic, but no apologies for reading it) understands that!

Edit: perhaps that also why folk get bamboozled by the dramatic differences between the far right spending plans of the GO and his brown shirts and those of the redder-that- red extreme marxists of Ed Balls and his team. understanding the current climate and challenges is really helped by presenting the context in RW v LW, isn't it!?!?! Creates lots of pages on here and lots of noise everywhere , but little if any knowledge

Indeed left-wingers often flaunt the fact that they are left-wing by including the term within their organisation's name.

<Resists temptation to invoke the wrath of Godwins law>

Plus I was referring to the RW v LW "debate" given that the debate between extremes of political and economic orthodoxy have been increasingly blurred. Even my bible (sic, but no apologies for reading it) understands that!

Even your bible the FT understands that it is perfectly acceptable to describe one side of a political argument as either left-wing or right-wing.

If that's good enough for a newspaper which claims 'no FT, no comment' then I suspect that it is good enough for most people. Except embarrassed right-wingers.

Even I have to accept the label Ernie gave me- what was it again? "Wishy washy pale pink liberal guardianista" or something similar IIRC

this isa part of why I find this so funny. Many of you seem to think I am some sort of rabid socialist when actually I am only leftish. Even Ernie has plenty room to the left of him compared to many folk I know

I would however characterise Blair and his cohorts as centre / centre right.

Indeed it does, Ernie, and some of its contributors still refer to monetarism vs keynesian as if they exists in black and white. And they both add similar amounts of value. You have proved the point exactly, especially with last sentence.

"good" is the enemy of "excellent" or should I say "good enough" is the enemy of "precise"?

Not "guardianista" TJ, I don't use the term........I find the term "Guardian reader" sufficiently insulting.

Even though I read the Guardian myself 🙂

🙂

But the FT also has some contributors who prefer precision to ease of use:

My main contention remains that the concept of a left-right spectrum, on which any politically interested person [b]can be[/b] placed, [b]obscures more than it illuminates. [/b]It [b]muffles important issues[/b] and erects barriers between those who should be allies.[b]

Samuel Brittan, FT 12/04/2012.

 

So...Will France be a better place in 2years time?

Well, its all relative isn't it - I mean, it will still be full of French people 😆

Samuel Brittan, FT 12/04/2012.

So the brother of Margret Thatcher's Chief Secretary to the Treasury, disciple of Milton Friedman, who in 1981, when 364 leading economists wrote a letter to The Times criticising Margaret Thatcher's economic policy, was one of the few commentators to openly defend the Conservative government's policy, doesn't like the label right-winger ?

Thank you for giving me an example of an 'embarrassed right-winger'. Got anymore ?

So...Will France be a better place in 2years time?

Not if those in the arena of finance can help it. How dare those Frenchies take a democratic decision! Don't they know we control the world?

How exactly does it work and how have we come to a be in a situation where the banking sector has so much influence and as such control over our lives, especially when that influence is detrimental to our quality of life.

So how does it work and isn't it the equivalent of coercion / blackmail for countries to only vote in certain parties?

You may not claim to know much Kaesae, but you've got this pretty much spot on. The sooner we rid ourselves of the current form of capitalism, it's worshipers and its "investors", the better we will be.

Ernie, his actual article is much more informative than Wiki bios but don't let that get in the way. You might even get his point, rather than superimposing yours on him.

His article clearly defines Hollande as being on the left, before returning to the actual point ie, whether defining the debate in these terms adds value. But don't let fact get in the way of a good argument, tis not the STW way. 😉

don't let fact get in the way of a good argument

And yet it is you who is 'not letting fact get in the way of your argument'.

The fact remains that the terms left-wing and right-wing are used extensively by both the media and politicians, despite your claim that it is "tired, outdated and sloppy". Even your own newspaper, who's opinions you apparently value so much, uses the terms. That is the fact.

His article clearly defines Hollande as being on the left, before returning to the actual point ie, whether defining the debate in these terms adds value.

So you've found a waffling intellectual who [i]clearly[/i] uses the term, and then questions himself whether he should have. Well I hardly feel that lays the basis for not using the term. Still, you could write a letter to the FT pointing out that iyo the terms left-wing and right-wing are "tired, outdated and sloppy", and ask them to please stop using them.

In the meantime I will maintain the claim that whilst right-wingers are more than happy to label left-wingers as left-wing, they are both embarrassed and reluctant to call themselves right-wing.

Which is hardly surprising really......who in their right mind would be happy to call themselves right-wing.

In the meantime I will maintain the claim that whilst right-wingers are more than happy to label left-wingers as left-wing, they are both embarrassed and reluctant to call themselves right-wing.

Which is hardly surprising really......who in their right mind would be happy to call themselves right-wing.

Agreed

TandemJeremy - Member
Whjy do some of those who commonly espouse right wing ideas deny being right wing? there are a few on here.
POSTED 14 HOURS AGO #

Economically I'm quite happy to be considered right-wing, what I don't like about the label is the way it's often associated with conservative (small c) politics, in particular here in Spain that means the reactionary, Catholic, post-Franco wing of the ruling party.

Ernie, it is unlike you not to read carefully. Are you swapping you mate's Edinburgh defence for the even more irritating version, the G Galloway version. I have been clear several times, but let me try again. It's not the terms RW and LW that I ( or some waffling intellectual - classy that BTW!) are commenting on, it the sloppy use of these terms to phrase the debates of what is going on in European politics at the moment. But if it really is too challenging for you to understand this and if you would rather do a GG and constantly rephrased things to suit, then so be it. As I said, "never..... 😉 ....

P.s plenty of right wingers are very happy with that definition including I imagine the Tory backbenchers who have their knickers in a twist at the moment. So they are probably not the ones objecting to others stereotyping them incorrectly!

I'm quite happy to be considered right-wing, what I don't like about the label is the way it's often associated with conservative (small c) politics

That there is the problem, right-wing is often associated with conservative politics, hence the reluctance to accept the label.

In contrast, left-wing is often associated with socialist politics, hence the acceptance of the label.

Are you swapping you mate's Edinburgh defence for the even more irritating version, the G Galloway version.

More irritating version ? As irritating as G Galloway ?

Aw, shucks.......thanks 8)

Aaw arguing in a friendly way, isn't that cute!

Zulu-Eleven - Member

I take it you're cheering the success of socialists then Darcy? I mean, all socialism is good isn't it, even the National type...

I rate this comment an unprecedented 3 ZOMGs.

That there is the problem, right-wing is often associated with conservative politics, hence the reluctance to accept the label.
In contrast, left-wing is often associated with socialist politics, hence the acceptance of the label.

Depends on the country, of course - socialism is almost a swear word in the States 🙂

And this is why I personally think the labelling is inadequate - both Stalin and Michael Foot were left-wing, for example, yet their politics were hardly identical.

I rate this comment an unprecedented 3 ZOMGs.

😯

Jeebus, I had completely missed it. Thankfully.

So where does a dark green like myself stand then?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Centre left - pale greens can be of the right tho and often are

socialism is almost a swear word in the States

That's a good thing though, no?

So where does a dark green like myself stand then?

North of the border in la la land. 😉

So where does a dark green like myself stand then?

With your head in the clouds?

So where does a dark green like myself stand then?

On a four axis spectrum, "authoritarian left".

Another adjunct, this time for those who are bemoaning the 'behaviour' of the 'markets' towards the result of the French election. Unfortunately, markets are supposed to be have rationally, but you have to adjust your concept of 'rationality' to understand that it's purpose (and therefore its rational behaviour) is to enhance or protect or mitigate against loss of the general wealth - usually in the short-term.

You really cannot shed any tears for the French comitting an act of national petulance and losing some of their 'value'. Just look at what has happened to the value of the rand since the end of apartheid. Five rand to the pound in 1995, as low as 14 a little over ten years later. Any sane person would argue that ending apartheid and supporting the resulting state was good, and rational from a human point of view. The markets have no scruples - they are just reactive for their own ends. Unfortuantely, there are actually flesh and blood people behind these markets - and there is the moral issue.

This also brings me (not entirely accidentally) onto an example where socialism is a good thing. Socialism in a developed, industrialised nation like France is just self-indulgence. However, when viewed in the context of post-apartheid South Africa, socialism as social engineering is the best way forward. You don't need to drive through too many roadworks in South Africa to realise:

a) They probably don't need doing in the first place

and

b) There are a lot of people employed to wave flags at traffic and generally mooch about.

To criticise this is to miss the point, though. This is how the ANC is trying to complete a slow-motion Robin Hood wealth redistribution. They could not afford to simply tax the hell out of the whites because they would then probably just have taken their money and cleared out. Instead, a gradual process of economic and social reallignment is being carried out. You also have to remember that the ANC had a national (and at times more powerful) rival in Sobukwe's Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), which advocated 'driving the white man into the sea'. Black and coloured South Africans ultimately rejected this (obviously very tempting) view in favour of a compratively peaceful solution. They also succeeding in dragging Inkatha kicking and screaming into a tacit understanding (despite the double-dealings of De Klerk and his cronies).

To decry socialism entirely is to be too dogmatic - but I do not believe it has any place in countries where 99.99% of the population have a roof over their head, a car, a TV and running water. It is decadence pure and simple when you consider the living conditions elsewhere in the world for people who work honestly and dilligently.

P.S. to further balance things out, I also think Britain's attitued to apartheid was pretty shabby, from covert non-interest (Wilson) to overt non-interest (Thatcher). Just goes to show - everyone is in the pockets of the markets to some extent!

However, when viewed in the context of post-apartheid South Africa, socialism as social engineering is the best way forward. You don't need to drive through too many roadworks in South Africa to realise:

a) They probably don't need doing in the first place

and

b) There are a lot of people employed to wave flags at traffic and generally mooch about.

To criticise this is to miss the point, though. This is how the ANC is trying to complete a slow-motion Robin Hood wealth redistribution. They could not afford to simply tax the hell out of the whites because they would then probably just have taken their money and cleared out. Instead, a gradual process of economic and social reallignment is being carried out.

I am impressed at how much pish you've managed to compress into so few words.

The wealth redistribution the ANC has achieved is not from rich white to poor black, but from corporations to the new elite (by way of BEEs) and from poor black to the new elite (by way of corruption and fraud). A huge chunk of whites (and educated or otherwise mobile South Africans of other races, for that matter) have cleared out and many of those who remain have transferred money overseas. The gradual process of economic and social realignment that takes place when unnecessary and overstaffed projects take place is one of sclerosis and inefficiency. The rand that is pissed away on a boondoggle to employ the mayor/governor/president's mate's road construction company is a rand that is spent highly inefficiently and is a rand that is not spent on e.g. healthcare. It is a rand stolen from the poor and given to the rich. Patronage is highly inefficient.