MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
It seems to me that it basically comes down to people having to earn or be born into their rights.
The higher you can climb then the more you can expect?
I've been doing a logical conclusion thing and trying to work out where it leaves those British citizens that happen to be at the bottom of the scale.
How brutal are you?
Would you see those that can't carry themselves left to fend for themselves?
I don't actually see a full right wing thing, I see a mix of people getting upset at a lot of things - from the left and the right, In some ways it's a true dismantling of the right/left politics of the past. We have life long labour supporters hitching on with right wing ideology etc. it's a bit all about me stuff but also the people left behind
Sounds nothing like any right wing agenda I've ever heard
Maybe go and read 'Road to Serfdom' and then come back to us
where it leaves those British citizens that happen to be at the bottom of the scale.
if you are a british citizen, then you are a very long way from the bottom of the scale.
Would you see those that can't carry themselves left to fend for themselves?
No point letting free labour go to waste. Just cut them loose for long enough until they have zero options then hoover them up and exploit them in such a way that it looks like we are doing them a favour. Not everyone has to be physically fit, we can always test stuff and experiment on the others.
Brilliant ninfan
You're such a worthwhile contibutor to the forum 😆
Yeah that was badly worded by me jambo.. obviously those that are really at the bottom of the scale will get shipped out tout suite
But would the hard right be content for British citizens to eventually live in poverty?
No, because apart from the humanitarian issue, they're not just going to lie down and die. They'll take from the rest. And anyway, they'll still need to find the rent for the spot of land that they intend to lie down and die on.
Seriously
Read it
Worked for Maggie!
"I don't actually see a full right wing thing, I see a mix of people getting upset at a lot of things - from the left and the right, In some ways it's a true dismantling of the right/left politics of the past."
Yup, I'm not sure right and left ever really meant anything but now they are certainly utterly meaningless labels.
Trump is widely accepted as a right winger yet he's been elected on a platform of massive Keynesian stimulus.
I can't even find a strict left/right definition.
obvious troll is obvious pic here
Would you see those that can't carry themselves left to fend for themselves?
ninfan - MemberSounds nothing like any right wing agenda I've ever heard
Maybe go and read 'Road to Serfdom' and then come back to us
😆
Mines a pint please yunki
Trump is widely accepted as a right winger yet he's been elected on a platform of massive Keynesian stimulus.
haha he's said a lot of things, lets see what he delivers.
I think we've seen the right adapt to twitter and soundbite politics far quicker than the left in the last few years. And also they are much better at claiming the language of the common sense middleground, whilst often delivering far far to the right of that.
Its very hard to figure out what UKIP and Trump are for or against below the headlines but that doesn't seem to matter anymore as the news cycle moves on before they are tested on it. UKIP seem to be an empty vessel that is enabling a range of people with differing values and backgrounds feel like they can see what they believe reflected in UKIP.
But would the hard right be content for British citizens to eventually live in poverty?
No because they need a market for their goods. But, a certain percentage of the population can be consigned to poverty (and indeed are) without that causing too much of an issue for unrestrained capitalism.
What is odd about a RW (sic) advocating Keynesian policies? Nothing new there and the two are not mutually exclusive.
The right wing agenda = divide & conquer
I fear for my children's future.
By all accounts, if he goes ahead with his Fiscal stimulus, it will be the poor who suffer most by the increase in the value of the $ and reduction in export related jobs as a consequence.
Swift had the solution.
The rich can eat the poor, but at the risk of the hungry eating the rich.
Sounds like the zombie apocalypse... 🙂
Trump thinks like a child. He doen't have any particular political ideology, so left/right doesn't help when trying to decide what to do about him. He probaby doesn't even understand where the government's money comes from, so he hasn't thought of the consequences of his spending pledges.
Neoliberalism innit
So after a bit of googling:
Left = Radical or Socialist.
Right = conservative, small 'c'.
Given that I guess Keynesian isn't Left wing 'cos it's pretty old hat, just part of the economic toolkit.
I still don't think these terms have any useful meaning at all: Adopting private insurance top up funding for the NHS would be pretty radical - would people call it left wing?
Maybe go and read 'Road to Serfdom' and then come back to us
are you suggesting that this is your influence?
OOB - is Hayek RW?
In that he suggests that tyrannical govts. inevitably arise from planned economies, or control of economic decision making, yes he's mostly considered "on the right" and is oft quoted by neo cons and libertarians. (often incorrectly a la Adam Smith)
Right wing agenda where?
OOB - is Hayek RW?
He's a liberal, yeah? If so then nice example. If we're going to pick conservative as our definition of 'right wing' then Liberalism in every sense has been the generally accepted status quo in the West for the best part of 100 years and is therefore ultra conservative and therefore ultra right wing! Which I think supports my contention that these labels have lost all purpose and probably never had any.
Well the OP's argument was difficult to understand, but agree that oft-used labels are often of little use.
Anyway, (LW) Keynes on (RW) Hayek - please take labels with pinch of salt:
After reading Hayek's The Road to Serfdom, Keynes wrote to Hayek, [b]"Morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with virtually the whole of it"
[/b]
😉
Anyway, sorry for the digression. Back to the party.....
Indeed, as Hayek was in favour of state controls for business, social help for the poor, protection for workers rights and controls over employment law, environmental controls, law and fraud prevention, and so on and on, there's no reason why Keynes wouldn't be in favour of his philosophy. But like all economic theories, there are valid criticisms that can be argued.
And lets not forget the irony of China(LW?) telling the USA(RW?) that they were spending far too much on social welfare!
BTW, I'm challenging all comers for good definitions of both LW and RW.
Or an austerity (sic) ultra-RW (sic^2) Tory (spit) government running one of the most expansionary fiscal policies in the developed world!!
Funny old world - still folk will be arguing that income inequality is rising next!
Labels, who needs them....
I think right wing can be summed up as "I can do what I please, other people's problems are not mine, but my problems can be blamed on other people"
For me, right wingness is a question of empathy.
No-one wants to give stuff away for nothing, do people who don't deserve it. The question is, are the poor and needy that way because it's their own fault, or things beyond their control? And if it's their fault, should they be left to face with the consequences themselves?
Very few people would leave their own family or close friends to struggle. We'd help. The question is, can you feel the same way about people you don't know, or you want to blame them for their own ****lessness? If you can empathise with strangers, you will be happy to help them. If you can't, you'll try and justify not helping them.
So mol, do you reckon the nasties are RW by your definition?
Any term where people can rock up and give their own definitions with little fear of contradiction means absolutely nothing.
Incidentally, to me, cheese means fence.
Beans means Heinz
the nasties
define Nasty
RW govts that go wrong are often (although not always) Authoritarian in nature, whereas most LW nut-bags go in for Totalitarianism...
I think as far as most of the population are concerned, if you're being trodden underfoot it doesn't matter which flavour that is....
We don't want lower bread prices,
we don't want higher bread prices,
we don't want unchanged bread prices,
we want National Socialist bread prices!
It needs defining?
"There's only one nasty party....one nasty party....there's only one nasty partyyyyyyyy...."
nickc - Member
I think as far as most of the population are concerned, if you're being trodden underfoot it doesn't matter which flavour that is....
True, true.
I don't think the OP expected the deluge of support that he's received 😆
Maybe organising a protest or inventing a hashtag will help?
There are a lot of migraines going around. That might explain things....
I just think of everyone as progressive, conservative or regressive. Though of course I mean "progress towards things I think are good". And so does everyone else.
The right wing agenda = divide & conquerI fear for my children's future.
Don't fear for them, fight for them.
The less well off have a myriad of reasons for being so, some people are unlucky, some people are ****less and some people make poor decisions. I cross London Bridge fairly often and each time without fail I see homeless people begging on the bridge. Whatever their reasons for being there it's completely disgusting that in the midst of one of the world's richest cities that they are.. So I do my meager bit, a coffee from pret, a sandwich or hot roll from the cafe by the station, couple of quid, whatever, not because I'm some wonderful person but I can't just walk by.
Left and right mean nothing to me you can put me in a box with a label if it helps you make sense of the world but I believe there are two kinds of people, pretty much, the walk pasts and the help outs and you can find both kinds at either end of the political spectrum. What matters isn't your opinion, it's what you actually do. Marching and posting silly facebook posts to show how disgusted you are isn't a patch on going out and helping where it's needed. Left and right are as guilty as each other.. I don't care about agendas or political beliefs I care about what people do, not what they say they're going to. In my experience nothing changes whoever's in charge, those people have been on that bridge for the last twenty years.
I wasn't after support.. I don't have a cause 🙂
I'm adjusting to the new right leaning world that I'm part of, trying to understand it.. My thread is opening up the discussion a bit so I'm winning
I'm a pragmatic kind of anarchist enfht
Not sure it is a right-leaning world? It possibly looks that way if we view it through the labels of the 20th century, but as has been said already it's pretty obvious they are no longer that useful.
Looks like it's more a 'me' leaning world...
So mol, do you reckon the nasties are RW by your definition?
The Tories?
Yes, broadly. But not all of them. There are some people who do care and are still right wingers because they think that the best way to help is through building business and jobs through private enterprise (like my sister in law). I think they are naieve though, tbh. Simple fact is - not everyone is equal* and some need more help than others.
What is a government actually for? Is it to ensure basic economic function and law and order? Is it meant to actually make sure everyone's needs are met? Is it to improve the quality of life of everyone?
If the government doesn't do these things, then who does? Perhaps once the church did, but not any more. My sister-in-law thinks that charity should help people and government should stay out - but charity is fickle, and can be handed out or withheld based on the judgements and prejudices of individuals. This isn't right, imo.
* everyone should have equal [i]opportunities[/i] but this means giving more to some than others because some people need more help than others. Everyone has different skills and different aptitude.
the tories are a broad church - some like Ken Clarke and David Willetts have some common decency and objectively think of others in less fortunate positions but there are some at the nutter end that are just in it for themselves and have a mentality that "it's their fault they are poor they should just work a bit harder" and the middle ground seem to believe in trickle down economics
as you can imagine the nutters (of which there are usually one or more in a tory cabinet) are the reason I can never vote for them
(but right now I can't align myself to Labour either and the libdems aren't appealing either really)
one nation tories are decent people who believe we are all made better by a free market and business generating wealth, the do believe in one nation and redressing balance in a "paternal" sense and they believe in society and making it better. At the other extreme you have posh toffs with a massive sense of entitlement [ boris, dave Cameron , Rees Mogg [ entertaining though he is]who think they got where they are by hard work and everyone else is lazy. Basically they won the competition and they want to maintain it to maintain their elite position within it. They dont much think of other folk , they dont know anyone ordinary and they have not a clue how most of us live our lives.
The former i disagree with but admire the later i despise
Good post Junky. The left suffers similar but opposite issues though. The good ones realise how important business is, the bad ones just default to the most left position like it's a competition.
Be nice to have a pragmatic alternative unencumbered by the dogma of left or right wouldn't it?
Be lovely to see a sensible party made up of scientists, engineers, economists and the like just doing what's right (not [i]that[/i] right!) according to logic and the circumstances.
A sensible balance between public and private enterprise, spending in check, help for those that need it whilst maintaining a good balance of good things (like the MHS) and essential things (like defence and policing)
Is it possible?
Guess how many MPs are scientists…
Not enough?
if only we had some data but feel I must point out that Thatcher was a scientist so I am a little less keen pn the idea than you 😉
TBH my own personal agenda is just to make things fairer I dont really care much about how we do it but it does not need to be this unfair either within our country or throughout the world. I am probably at the extreme ed of wanting it fair and see little way of doing it without massive regulation intervention as this is what capitalism* gives us if we dont.
It s further exacerbated by the fact those who win also control so much media and other agenda setting agencies so they are always what is best for them and then feed it to the masses who are largely disinterested in politics as they are all the same and nothing much changes - IMHO this is because no one is that radical
I dont mind how folk want to help but you have to want to as life need not be this unfair. I also think the wealthy west has a duty to the poorer nations in the world and we could all eat and see our kids grow old.
* I know its mixed but you get the point i would move much further the other way, personally yet it would still be mixed though some would view its as positively Leninist.
if only we had some data but feel I must point out that Thatcher was a scientist so I am a little less keen pn the idea than you
Yeah, bunch of ****s those scientists eh? 😉
Strange old thing this help vs responsibility, at personal or governmental level.
I dont mind how folk want to help but you have to want to as life need not be this unfair. I also think the wealthy west has a duty to the poorer nations in the world and we could all eat and see our kids grow old.
You could create and join a supranational body that has social democracy as its central tenet. Ahh ..........