MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
That's an incredibly arrogant view.
Centrism is inherently conservative. It doesn't want to change anything fundamentally, just tweak it around the edges to make it work a tiny bit better, because radical change would almost certainly negatively impact those who currently benefit from the status quo. That seems pretty obvious to me, and it's hardly arrogant to say so.
What is arrogant is the centrist view that the way we run our economy and government is set in stone and cannot be changed. It's demonstrable nonsense, yet again and again we're told there is no alternative and anyone who disagree is either a dangerous extremist or deluded fantasist.
I'm confused.. By your logic a conservative is centrist?
Conservative is quite a wooly term.. Does that mean right wing?
How can a person or entity be both centrist and right wing?
Is the age of quantum politics upon us already? Lol
Centrism is inherently conservative.
Oh ffs everyone knows what centrist means, it is a euphemism for "right-winger" ! 🤣
Unlike Lefties right-wingers for obvious reasons don't like to be honest about their political leanings. When was the last time that you heard someone claim "I'm a bit of a Righty"? Never, I would hazard to guess.
There is no such thing as a centre position in politics, the only people who can genuinely claim to be neither left nor right are people who have zero interests in politics.
By definition centrist means political neutrality, I have never met anyone with any interest in politics who was politically neutral.
The reality is that the government has made it increasingly difficult for centrists to defend its policies
Naive of you to think that centrists would even want to defend some of this government's policies.
I can align myself with @mattyfez list and I consider myself to be Social Democrat.
I have no interest in debating politics on here, I hope I've made that clear enough.
it's incredibly clear that you have no interest in participating in this thread.
I didn't say that.
Happy to explain why I'm not debating politics, it's because of exactly that sort of snide comment.
Centrism is inherently conservative.
Oh ffs everyone knows what centrist means, it is a euphemism for "right-winger" ! 🤣
Unlike Lefties right-wingers for obvious reasons don't like to be honest about their political leanings. When was the last time that you heard someone claim "I'm a bit of a Righty"? Never, I would hazard to guess.
There is no such thing as a centre position in politics, the only people who can genuinely claim to be neither left nor right are people who have zero interests in politics.
By definition centrist means political neutrality, I have never met anyone with any interest in politics who was politically neutral.
The utterly blinkered opinionated bollocks is strong on this thread today.
Jonv seems to have made the right decision trying not to be dragged in to be told what he thinks/believes.
Naive of you to think that centrists would even want to defend some of this government's policies.
I am saying that they no longer want to defend the current government hence the ad hominem attacks as wonderfully illustrated by the now famous Taliban-esque rant.
So the current attorney general who happens to be Jewish is accused of falling foul of Godwin's Law and has allegedly now apologised to Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch for comparing them to the Nazis.
And yet I cannot see anything in that Guardian article in which he compares Reform and the Tories with the Nazis.
Hermer, according to the article, merely stated :
“The claim that international law is fine as far as it goes, but can be put aside when conditions change, is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by ‘realist’ jurists in Germany, most notably Carl Schmitt, whose central thesis was in essence the claim that state power is all that counts, not law.
There is no mention of the Nazis there and whilst Carl Schmitt did have a relationship with the Nazi Party he was influenced by the political philosopher Leo Strauss who was Jewish, he also later fell out with the Nazis, so he is probably not the best example of a Nazi, I would have thought.
Hermer also said :
"Because of the experience of what followed in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law, as well as internal constitutional law.”
Which sounds totally reasonable to me. International law was toughen up after WW2 because of the behaviour of the Nazis, so why not say it?
And what's wrong with making a comparison with the rise of the far-right today with the rise of the far-right in the 1930s?
I can't believe that Hermer apologised, in fact I would be interested in knowing more of what he actually said.
I could claim I can fly.. It's untrue but I can still make that claim.
Odd you say that, because it's not far off what you are actually claiming - that you, mattyfez, can define the centre of political thought, independent of any cultural, historical, psychological, religious or other biases. That's quite a pedestal to put yourself on - try not to look down!!
Pictures! Pictures! This thread needs more pictures!
Anything will do just as long as it keeps politics off the politics thread. Politics iz difficult.
Post or don't, but why do you feel the need to keep banging on about why you're not posting?
I can't speak for anyone else but I'd love to contribute to and learn from this and other political threads, but they've become so miserably toxic that it makes it incredibly hard to. And for all the "if you've got a problem with how someone posts in here, just say so" rhetoric on the The Forum Is Dead/Dying thread, the political regulars are so painfully thin-skinned that there's just no point.
The utterly blinkered opinionated bollocks
Mate it’s about politics, the whole point of politics is to be opinionated. The problem on this thread isn’t opinions, it’s the inability of some mostly centrist types to accept that anyone might not agree with them. instead of engaging in debate they dismiss a whole group of people as sixth form extremists or pompously dismiss any arguments as not serious or realistic.
I can align myself with @mattyfez list and I consider myself to be Social Democrat.
Today it was announced that Starmer's Labour government will plough billions of pounds of investments into the North and the Midlands.
This is widely seen as a response to the growing threat from Reform and represents one of the few genuine left-wing redistribution of wealth policies to have come from the current government since it took office.
Mattyfez's response to that announcement was "it absolutely stinks".
I think you might have redefined what being a social democrat actually means.
Pictures! Pictures! This thread needs more pictures!
Anything will do just as long as it keeps politics off the politics thread. Politics iz difficult.
"Oh ffs everyone knows what centrist means, it is a euphemism for "right-winger" !"
Stop talking shite then?
Odd you say that, because it's not far off what you are actually claiming - that you, mattyfez, can define the centre of political thought, independent of any cultural, historical, psychological, religious or other biases. That's quite a pedestal to put yourself on - try not to look down!!
A hilarious meme - last refuge of the centrist 🙂
The problem on this thread isn’t opinions, it’s the inability of some mostly centrist types to accept that anyone might not agree with them.
I don't think that it is the current problem with this thread. I think the problem is that they are doing their best to trash the thread because frankly Keir Starmer is proving to be an embarrassment to them.
Some keep away, some launch into ad hominem attacks, and some post pictures.
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government.
Odd you say that, because it's not far off what you are actually claiming - that you, mattyfez, can define the centre of political thought, independent of any cultural, historical, psychological, religious or other biases. That's quite a pedestal to put yourself on - try not to look down!!
A hilarious meme - last refuge of the centrist 🙂
I don't need a refuge, my views are my views...
Centrism for persons such as yourself just seems to be a 'catch all ' phrase to insult anything or anyone you don't agree with...
Why try to twist things? it's just not productive.
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government with you.
my views are my views.
and that’s fine but you seem to want to pretend that they’re universal and objective
The problem on this thread isn’t opinions, it’s the inability of some mostly centrist types to accept that anyone might not agree with them.
I don't think that it is the current problem with this thread. I think the problem is that they are doing their best to trash the thread because frankly Keir Starmer is proving to be an embarrassment to them.
Some keep away, some launch into ad hominem attacks, and some post pictures.
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt...
I have no love for Starmer, never have, never will.
Did I vote labour in the last GE? yes I did.
Why you may ask?
I saw that as better option than a tory or reform government, and as far as I can guage, I was completely correct in that judgement.
That's not to be confused with thinking I'm a fan of Starmer, or even a fan of labour, at all. In fact I'd take starmers labour any day over farrage or whatever patsy the conservatives chose as thier next leader.
As a voter I can only play the cards I'm dealt, so I chose the least worst option that stood half a chance of winning (IMO).
my views are my views.
and that’s fine but you seem to want to pretend that they’re universal and objective
And you seem to think that any one to the right of Pol Pot is right wing...do you not see how absurd that sounds?
Don't post false comments and I won't have to correct them. And stop with the personal attacks making out I'm some sort of effete softy which I find so very hurtful!
Seriously - I'm trying to not make this ad hominem but sometimes truth has to be told. To use the pub analogy, you know when the loudmouths arrive and you know that conversation's just going to go one way. So you quickly drink up and go to another pub. Red Lion, anyone?
And here we are.
This thread has had new life largely on the back of the 'Death of the Forum' one last weekend. It's not been a new life of sparkling political critique though, it's been one of people explaining why the threads have become stale. It's the busiest this thread has been in months, what with the delays in refresh sometimes there are 3 or 4 new comments to catch up on before you post again. Imagine!
It tells me that there could be life in this pub still, but the loudmouths need to actually consider whether they ARE the problem, or whether they still think everyone else just needs to adjust to their style. But I'm not seeing any evidence of that happening; in fact I'll predict I'll get 2 or 3 obvious comebacks from 'The Six' when telling would be for them to actually stop for a bit and do some introspection.
And you seem to think that any one to the right of Pol Pot is right wing...do you not see how absurd that sounds?
of course it’s absurd, which is why I’ve never said it. It’s not me that has been appealing to “mathematics” to prop up his phoney philosophy.
Whatever, dude, I'm out for now
Don’t let the door hit you
[quote data-userid="1990" data-postid="13582282"
Don’t let the door hit you
I haven't actualy gone, no such luck..but look! we can all do insults and take people out of context for scoring imaginary points!
I think you might have redefined what being a social democrat actually means.
I was referring to this list:
1.I belive we should have a health care system funded by general taxaton... So I'm left wing.
2. I belive we should have a police force, so I'm authoritarian.
3. I belive in a free market so I'm right wing.
4. I belive in things like bodily automity when it comes to things like abortion, That makes me a libertarian.
Not this in a different post:
I think it absolutely stinks..
To which you replied:
I know exactly what you mean, and it's a valid point.
But I'm sure you are aware of this.
Did I vote labour in the last GE? yes I did.
I didn’t. I could never vote for Starmer (Gaza) but I didn’t anyway. I voted Green. I didn’t imagine that they would win, but I hoped that if the major parties saw that there were a lot of people with Green sympathies they would alter their course. Probably that was naive but I also looked to the example of Syriza in Greece, who broke the 2 party system. You can argue about the outcome but it showed that a vote can count.
I haven't actualy gone
In the words of the country song - how can I miss you, when you won’t go away?
It tells me that there could be life in this pub still, but the loudmouths need to actually consider whether they ARE the problem, or whether they still think everyone else just needs to adjust to their style.
ChatGPT - write a response including the term “self-awareness”
The problem on this thread isn’t opinions, it’s the inability of some mostly centrist types to accept that anyone might not agree with them
Yeah, it's all those thin skinned over reacting centrists shouting down the poor lefties.
I haven't actualy gone
In the words of the country song - how can I miss you, when you won’t go away?
ooh..I do like a good country song, here's a Willie Nelson number for you... 😉
Do the Eagles count as country? because this thread is like... 😘
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government.
Alright, with my centrist, voted for Starmer hat on - they've been a ****ing disappointment. Failed to create a vision for people to vote for at the election. Got in on the back of an anti-Tory vote that split with Reform. Have then turned right wing on many of the big high profile issues to foolishly try and keep the perceived threat from Reform at bay, while quietly doing a few more left wing minor things.
They've been clueless, spineless, and next to useless. The fact that they are possibly less toxic than the Tories would have been is scant consolation.
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government.
Alright, with my centrist, voted for Starmer hat on - they've been a ****ing disappointment. Failed to create a vision for people to vote for at the election. Got in on the back of an anti-Tory vote that split with Reform. Have then turned right wing on many of the big high profile issues to foolishly try and keep the perceived threat from Reform at bay, while quietly doing a few more left wing minor things.
They've been clueless, spineless, and next to useless. The fact that they are possibly less toxic than the Tories would have been is scant consolation.
Agreed... it's not black and white... insinuating that anyone who voted labour last GE must therefore love Starmer and everything he does is just Trumpian levels of disingenuousness. It's utterly pathetic.
But none of them want to talk about Sir Keir Starmer and his government with you.
As you can imagine I am not massively disappointed ! 😂
But there appears to be no one on this thread that you want to discuss Sir Keir Starmer and his government with.
You do understand what the purpose of this thread is don't you?!?!?
I think it absolutely stinks..
To which you replied:
I know exactly what you mean, and it's a valid point.
But I'm sure you are aware of this.
Yup, I know exactly what mattyfez means, and it is a valid point, especially if you are a right-winger, I just don't agree with it.
Although I did say that I might if we lived in a classless society where everyone had equal access to resources.
I believe that Labour governments exist to serve the interests of working people above all others, which is why I posted that quote by Michael Foot in which he makes the point so eloquently.
Edit : Here is an example of someone who strongly disagrees with pre-Starmer Labour governments redistribution of wealth into deprived areas
But I'm not seeing any evidence of that happening; in fact I'll predict I'll get 2 or 3 obvious comebacks from 'The Six' when telling would be for them to actually stop for a bit and do some introspection.
STW - can I change my login name to Nostradamus. Or if that's taken, Clinton Baptiste?
But there appears to be no one on this thread that you want to discuss Sir Keir Starmer and his government with.
Oh, there's plenty.
I'm happy to discuss Starmer...
I'll give him 5.5 out of 10 so far.
That's not discussing Starmer and the government is it?
Just to add I class anything less than a 5 to be a failure..I'm only giving him +0.5 as he hasn't managed to crash the economy or piss the EU off too much yet, but it's not a high bar, and there's time.
I think the problem is that they are doing their best to trash the thread
🤐
Read that back, slowly.
It's not a great look on a thread where we're supposed to be discussing the government.
Go on then, read back slowly....... today I brought up two fairly important developments concerning the current government. One relates to the announcement of tens of billions of pounds being ploughed into the North and the Midlands, and the other one concerns the government's attorney general.
The whinging centrists on here have zero interest in discussing these issues preferring instead to engage in ad hominem arguments with the "pub bores" which they repeatedly assure us that they have absolutely nothing they want to discuss with.
Well I say they have zero interest in discussing these issues the most vocal self-identified centrist on here claims that Labour's leveling up policy "absolutely stinks".
What is it about hypocrisy which attracts centrists so much whether they be in government or on a MTB forum?
Read that back, slowly.
It's not a great look on a thread where we're supposed to be discussing the government.
Go on then, read back slowly....... today I brought up two fairly important developments concerning the current government. One relates to the announcement of tens of billions of pounds being ploughed into the North and the Midlands, and the other one concerns the government's attorney general.
The whinging centrists on here have zero interest in discussing these issues preferring instead to engage in ad hominem arguments with the "pub bores" which they repeatedly assure us that they have absolutely nothing they want to discuss with.
Well I say they have zero interest in discussing these issues the most vocal self-identified centrist on here claims that Labour's leveling up policy "absolutely stinks".
What is it about hypocrisy which attracts centrists so much whether they be in government or on a MTB forum?
What about being centrist makes you think I, or others think the sun shines out of Starmers bum?
I'm only giving him +0.5 because he hasn't crashed the economy or further sullied our relationship with the EU. Yet.
Things I think he's been terrible on:
Echoing the 'stop the boats' rhetoric whilst not offering any long term solution.
The winter fuel allowance - this should have been really easy - means test it like any other benefit... got more than £16k in cash or investments? no fuel allowance for you.
Inviting a rapist on a state visit.. I mean, really? will we be seeing Andrew Tate addressing parliament next? lol
That's just three things off the top of my head.
Yeah, it's all those thin skinned over reacting centrists shouting down the poor lefties.
Lets look back shall we at the bile filled threads at anyone who supported Corbyn, tories or voted brexit shall we? When in doubt binners spewed his hilarious memes (mostly nicked from the daily mail and other right wings rags but since his fan club wouldnt deign to look at those sites they seem convinced that he was a comic genius) to kill off any conversation.
Its because even the dimmest supporter for starmer has slowly caught up that he might just possibly not be representing them that it has slowly died off and since Binner doesnt have people to bow down to his comic genius he is left venting in a rage that people dont match his ideological purity.
Since they managed to drive off anyone rightwing that basically leaves the leftwing.
The theotherjonv occasionally makes an effort with posts that hurl abuse and then pats himself on the back that people might respond to him in kind.
There's been plenty of bile spewed on all sides over the last couple of years.
I'm only giving him +0.5 because he hasn't crashed the economy or further sullied our relationship with the EU. Yet.
There is no technical definition of crashing the economy btw. Despite it repeated constantly.
Anything that Truss did was resolved very quickly because that's the nature of fiat currencies. They go down and someone buys them up. Labour also falsely conflated the BoE interest rate policy with Truss's performance. Blaming her rather than the BoE's needless endeavour with interest rate rises.
If Labour were so appalled at interest rates they could have lowered them any time they wanted to. The BoE works for the government not the other way around.
You see this is the issue - despite Truss being ridiculous - your metric appears to be - how good are the financial markets performing? rather than how bad are public outcomes in the real world which extends to more than looking at fiat currencies bobbing up and down.
These are the lenses Centrists use instead of how many homeless people did we see today? Why is the energy market not fit for purposes. Why are hospitals failing. Etc.
That's why Centrism is hopeless. It doesn't deal with fixing the real world it's just there to maintain the status-quo from financial perspective because it believes the financial markets sprang into existence to tell the government how to behave.
We will always be a pathetic mess of a country if the government dare not invest - because of errr Truss.
So therefore Starmer is good because he didn't do a Truss. Great what is he going to do then?
Until they chose to understand that centrism simply means someone who doesn't hold extreme views in any particular direction, the clue is in the name,
Its a title taken by a certain groups to try and present themselves as the reasonable option hence why the other phrases often used include "moderate" and "pragmatic".
If you look at it it obviously runs into the problem of, as the political compass attempts to address, that there are many different centres as there are positions. It would be rather odd for someone to be truly centrist on everything after reasonably considering each in turn.
Which is why in the UK its generally taken as "left" on social issues and "right" on economical issues as portrayed by Blair and Cameron (hug a hoodie anyone?) even if it was more in promises vs actions. We can look onwards to May and Johnson who also offered a more what would be considered left wing platform although didnt quite, to put it mildly, deliver.
It is also clear that the definition of what is centre per policy vs over time and by country. If we take economic issues we can see we have ended up with what would have been considered extreme policies pre Thatcher/Reagan being considered centrist now. Its always educational to look at the people described as "centrist" or "moderate" in the USA.
Another example would be slavery. Hopefully no one here takes a "centrist" view on it but instead we all agree on the extreme view that it should be banned?
Once you deal with those minor problems we could then move onto the problem of extremism of views vs extremism of deed. The Russian revolution being a good example where the most "extreme" left wing parties actually lost out to the more "moderate" Bolsheviks since the latter were rather more keen on extremism of deed.
What about being centrist makes you think I, or others think the sun shines out of Starmers bum?
I haven't claimed that you do. In fact I can't imagine why anyone would think that the sun shines out of Sir Keir Starmer's arse.
I am claiming that you, and the other vocal centrists on here, don't want to discuss the subject of this thread, ie, the UK government.
There is a high probability, thanks in no small part to Starmer, that in 4 years time we will have some sort of Reform-Tory government. And as a consequence there is also a high probability that the UK will leave the European Convention of Human Rights.
IMHO that would be an absolute disaster and today there was a news story concerning the government's Attorney General who was pointing out the dangers this would have and how regressive it would be.
I provided a link but none of the usual suspects wanted to discuss it, instead they wanted to spend their time on the thread bickering with "the pub bores" informing them how much they didn't like engaging with them.
So much ironing
Still here, still whinging. It's your MO, isn't it
I'd probably accept whinging more than hurling abuse, but I don't think either are particularly accurate. I'd say I've provided a reasoned explanation of why 'the centrists' don't engage much any more and even some suggestion that might change that.
But part of self awareness is listening to other's opinions so thanks for your comments, I'll try to be be less whingy and abusive.
What do you think your MO is?
I haven't claimed that you do. In fact I can't imagine why anyone would think that the sun shines out of Sir Keir Starmer's arse.
Indeed I think the suggestion is more the opposite with the previous supporters who kept telling everyone not voting for him was voting for tory have gone quiet.
I mean we could go with that they are now too highbrow and self respecting to engage in spats/insults/repetitive discussion but a cursory look at the Corbyn, Johnson/tory and Trump threads doesnt show a track record of that. Just a tailing off during Starmers PMship as it becomes increasingly difficult to support him.
"There is no such things as the government's money there is only tax payer's money" - said Thatcher years ago. Despite the clueless witch making stuff up and ignoring the fact it says "BoE" on all notes.
And every centrist believes it still. Thatcher literally defined your understanding of money so the 'right' and the moderate right could put a murdeous squeeze on government spending.
Right-wing economics has become accepted as the correct framework rather than a failed framework that has delivered the likes of Reeves to where she is.
I'd probably accept whinging more than hurling abuse,
I haven't accused you of hurling abuse so why bring it up?
What do you think your MO is?
I will happily admit I respond in kind. Which gives a problem if you consider your approach reasonable and balanced and I consider it an extreme case of passive aggressiveness. Just to take a few quotes
"you know when the loudmouths arrive "
"loudmouths need to actually consider whether they ARE the problem"
"so-called 'six' and their accolytes"
I am not sure I have read anything from you which isnt basically throwing punches but also combined with a complaint someone might respond to you throwing those punches in kind although possibly less veiled.
I do suspect you and others dont quite think about the phrases you are using whilst not you, at least in the last few pages, the use of "grown ups", "pragmatic", "realist" and so forth are all extremely loaded statements implying that anyone who doesnt hold the same views are the opposite.
Until they chose to understand that centrism simply means someone who doesn't hold extreme views in any particular direction, the clue is in the name,
Its a title taken by a certain groups to try and present themselves as the reasonable option hence why the other phrases often used include "moderate" and "pragmatic".
If you look at it it obviously runs into the problem of, as the political compass attempts to address, that there are many different centres as there are positions. It would be rather odd for someone to be truly centrist on everything after reasonably considering each in turn.
Which is why in the UK its generally taken as "left" on social issues and "right" on economical issues as portrayed by Blair and Cameron (hug a hoodie anyone?) even if it was more in promises vs actions. We can look onwards to May and Johnson who also offered a more what would be considered left wing platform although didnt quite, to put it mildly, deliver.
It is also clear that the definition of what is centre per policy vs over time and by country. If we take economic issues we can see we have ended up with what would have been considered extreme policies pre Thatcher/Reagan being considered centrist now. Its always educational to look at the people described as "centrist" or "moderate" in the USA.
Another example would be slavery. Hopefully no one here takes a "centrist" view on it but instead we all agree on the extreme view that it should be banned?
Once you deal with those minor problems we could then move onto the problem of extremism of views vs extremism of deed. The Russian revolution being a good example where the most "extreme" left wing parties actually lost out to the more "moderate" Bolsheviks since the latter were rather more keen on extremism of deed.
I'm not sure what you want me to say... I'm not responsible for others misinterpretations.
Another example would be slavery. Hopefully no one here takes a "centrist" view on it but instead we all agree on the extreme view that it should be banned?
If you think abolition of slavery is an extremist view, (I'd simply call it 'not being evil') then you are truly lost.
If you think abolition of slavery is an extremist view, (I'd simply call it 'not being evil') then you are truly lost.
At the time it was, though. Owning slaves was “centrist”. Stoning adultresses to death is “centrist” in some places. In our time and culture eating meat is centrist. Maybe in future that will be considered “being evil”. Not all times and not all cultures have the benefit of your insight into The Truth.
I haven't accused you of hurling abuse so why bring it up?
I didn't. That was what another poster accused me of, effectively therefore saying that's their opinion of my MO, so I addressed both together.
m so I have haven't even bothered answering]
So to dissonance, who at least has given opinion of why they feel I hurl abuse; if comparing some of the behaviour on here to the pub bore / loudmouth and the kind of insult coming back is 'responding in kind' then I'll try even harder.
Finally "whilst not you, at least in the last few pages" - thank you, that is very important to me. As I put in my long post, I was guilty in the past, went and sat and thought about it, and then didn't post for a long time. Since back, at the risk of annoying, I've not participated in the political discussion but have commented on why I and others don't any more. In doing that I have tried hard to not be abusive, passive aggressive, loaded, whatever - just to speak my opinion which yes, has called out some behaviours. But from your comment "I am not sure I have read anything from you which isnt basically throwing punches" (please go back and see if that's really the case) it seems that you think that I still haven't got that right so I will reflect further and try harder. But it's not just me that needs to do it.
If you think abolition of slavery is an extremist view, (I'd simply call it 'not being evil') then you are truly lost.
At the time it was, though. Owning slaves was “centrist”. Stoning adultresses to death is “centrist” in some places. In our time and culture eating meat is centrist. Maybe in future that will be considered “being evil”. Not all times and not all cultures have the benefit of your insight into The Truth.
Nonsense.
You are confusing societal "norms", for want of a better phrase, with a political position, when they are two different things.
@theotherjonv I think we've reached the "leave 'im, it's not worth it" stage. They're dragging you down to their level and beating you with experience.
You are confusing societal "norms", for want of a better phrase, with a political position, when they are two different things.
No they really aren’t, and it’s perverse to imagine that they could be. Is apartheid a “societal norm” distinct from political viewpoint? Access to free education? Universal healthcare? Anything?
Let's really just face it. Centrism is not really doing anything for fear of doing something that might change the world for the better.
So in that case you're just letting all the muck of Conservatism float to the top and supporting it.
(And then complaining about it endlessly.)
My favourite though is 'Centrists are just Tories that don't want to pay for their own healthcare.'
So the radical policy of the abolition of slavery was actually a centrist position? Blimey, whatever next..... the 1945 Labour government wasn't left-wing at all, it was pursuing "centrist" policies when it created the first free national health service in the western world?
As I said previously, "centrist" is a euphemism for right-winger, Sir Keir Starmer has in the last few months proved that spectacularly.
Unlike Lefties Righties are generally embarrassed by their political position. Calling someone a right-wing is often seen as an insult, calling someone left-wing rarely so.
MCTD - wise words as always and I think you're right, but with one caveat.
We have a mantra at my workplace "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept"
The comment yesterday - I tried to respond with (admittedly barbed) humour, but there was no follow up. At the time I was very annoyed but rather than respond again, I promised myself I'd sleep on it and look again. Which I did, and I still find it offensive.
If accidental (and it was a deliberate choice of words / avoidance of 'hold your nose' which makes me wonder how accidental it could be) then it still requires calling out.
If it was deliberate then irrespective of difference in opinion of political or debating style, I would hope that others would call it out as unacceptable.
[or I'll give another option - if that sort of comment is considered OK and I'm overreacting then tell me so - but be careful at the standards you are walking past]
You are confusing societal "norms", for want of a better phrase, with a political position, when they are two different things.
No they really aren’t, and it’s perverse to imagine that they could be. Is apartheid a “societal norm” distinct from political viewpoint? Access to free education? Universal healthcare? Anything?
Apartheid was a racist, right wing policy. It was not a societal norm, nor was it a centrist position in South Africa.
MCTD - wise words as always and I think you're right, but with one caveat.
We have a mantra at my workplace "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept"
The comment yesterday - I tried to respond with (admittedly barbed) humour, but there was no follow up. At the time I was very annoyed but rather than respond again, I promised myself I'd sleep on it and look again. Which I did, and I still find it offensive.
If accidental (and it was a deliberate choice of words / avoidance of 'hold your nose' which makes me wonder how accidental it could be) then it still requires calling out.
If it was deliberate then irrespective of difference in opinion of political or debating style, I would hope that others would call it out as unacceptable.
[or I'll give another option - if that sort of comment is considered OK and I'm overreacting then tell me so - but be careful at the standards you are walking past]
That's a great post about yourself, anything to say about the subject matter of this thread?
As I said previously, "centrist" is a euphemism for right-winger, Sir Keir Starmer has in the last few months proved that spectacularly.
Unlike Lefties Righties are generally embarrassed by their political position. Calling someone a right-wing is often seen as an insult, calling someone left-wing rarely so.
You are deliberately making shit up to support your own agenda.
@theotherjonv - I've hit the report button a few times but not followed it through. Might be time for the mods to lock the tread for a few days.
You are deliberately making shit up to support your own agenda.
You mean it's true the term Righty like Lefty is a widely used term and accusing people of being left-wing is a common insult?
Are you sure?
Centrism is not really doing anything for fear of doing something that might change the world for the better.
Where as being leftwing seems to involve screaming into the void about how easy it would be to just fix everything based on not living with reality.
Plus ca change
ps I think Starmer could learn a thing or two about presentation, however I'm ultimately broadly happy with the government's direction but then I subscribe to the we have limited resources school of thought and as a society we can't keep increasing the number of people who don't contribute but consume from the rest of us. Oh and the amount of those resources tied up in the hands of a tiny minority is sickening but I've no idea how as a small sovereign state we tackle that, it's a global problem that needs tackling globally but there's no mechanism to do that.
If we want long term improvement in people lives more short term benefits isn't the answer, housing and energy costs need to be tackled and Starmer has policies for both those issues, whether they succeed is another matter. What the lefties refer to as fear of change is really the grinding reality of the complexities and time required to make real sustainable change, particularly when you have right wing populists stirring shit all the time. It would great being able to bulldoze policies through against the will of the idiots they will ultimately benefit but again reality gets in the way.
Of course while not being above dishing out a few barbs of your own
Barbs - yes guilty. But I would hope I have stopped well before the line that I believe you have crossed. Whether accidental or deliberate.
OK, I've reported your post and STW/the Mods can decide.
Apartheid was a racist, right wing policy. It was not a societal norm, nor was it a centrist position in South Africa.
You'll have to explain how the transition from slavery to segregation to apartheid took place while the "centre" remained constant.
I've got to agree with the lefties on this one, the centre does move. The left view of the world 100 years ago was much more to the right than it is now. Generally western society has been moving left for the last 150 years, the current swing to the right will hopefully correct itself at some point.
OK, I've reported your post and STW/the Mods can decide.
Hopefully the mods are aware that smelling salts and scented hankies were commonplace in Georgian times for men and women(*), and there is no homophobic implication in mentioning them. Perhaps the mistake says more about you than about ransos?
(*) I confess to only knowing about this due to watching Bargain Hunt, where "vinaigrettes" - boxes for smelling salts and perfume - often make good money.
Doesn't the term centrist just mean you broadly agree with the way society currently functions?
In contrast to centrists you have radicals who want an overhaul and fundamental change to the way society is run?
If that definition is correct then is the main conflict on this thread between those who think society is broadly OK, just needing a few tweaks, and those who feel society is fundamentally breaking and needs radical change.
If all that is true then I can see why people are getting so upset with each other. We aren't talking about a relatively simple left/right argument. We're talking about fundamentally different ways of viewing the world that can never be reconciled.
Fun times.
Hopefully the mods are aware that smelling salts and scented hankies were commonplace in Georgian times for men and women(*), and there is no homophobic implication in mentioning them. Perhaps the mistake says more about you than about ransos?
The mods think I'm being argumentative.... they don't seem to think I'm a raging homophobe though. So the centrists are free to pursue their gaslighting, memes and insults, and I won't be answering back.
The mods think I'm being argumentative....
Blimey, what must they think of mattyfez and all the other angry moderates?
Anyway any chance of moving away from personal grievances against individuals and moving onto politics?
Yesterday's announcement that the government intends pumping a hundred billion pounds into the North and the Midlands reminded me of this "signed pledge" by Starmer :
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1227500629439873027
Which made me think isn't it time to make a bold radical (centrist) commitment to regional parliaments with substantial budgets to spend as democratically decided by the people of the regions, instead of leaving it all to the personal whims of a Chancellor of the Exchequer in Downing Street?
Edit. : Apologies, I don't know how pledge number 7 got included with pledge number 8