Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I actually think most people are close to the centre but the extremes make more noise, and in the case of the far left have a disproportionate influence in the media and the arts. " How are you defining ‘far left’? Far left (IMO) is communism. I’m not aware of any openly communist influences in the media or arts. The problem is that the Overton window in the U.K is to the right, which becomes increasingly obvious when people suggest that Starmer (centrist) is accused of being a socialist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I actually think most people are close to the centre but the extremes make more noise, and in the case of the far left have a disproportionate influence in the media and the arts. How are you defining ‘far left’? Far left (IMO) is communism. I’m not aware of any openly communist influences in the media or arts. The problem is that the Overton window in the U.K is to the right, which becomes increasingly obvious when people suggest that Starmer (centrist) is accused of being a socialist." Governments in the UK have been shifting further to the Left since 1997. In reality since then we have had a Continuity Blair Government the hallmarks of which have been: Mass immigration Bigger state control, regulation and expenditure with resultant economic stagnation Higher taxes Imperialist foreign escapades (often deluded) A belief that globalist and multinational interests should override the interests of the nation state and the wishes of the local populace. The current Labour government is just the final denouement of the Blairite uni party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I actually think most people are close to the centre but the extremes make more noise, and in the case of the far left have a disproportionate influence in the media and the arts. How are you defining ‘far left’? Far left (IMO) is communism. I’m not aware of any openly communist influences in the media or arts. The problem is that the Overton window in the U.K is to the right, which becomes increasingly obvious when people suggest that Starmer (centrist) is accused of being a socialist. Governments in the UK have been shifting further to the Left since 1997. In reality since then we have had a Continuity Blair Government the hallmarks of which have been: Mass immigration Bigger state control, regulation and expenditure with resultant economic stagnation Higher taxes Imperialist foreign escapades (often deluded) A belief that globalist and multinational interests should override the interests of the nation state and the wishes of the local populace. The current Labour government is just the final denouement of the Blairite uni party. " Corbyn was the only genuine ‘left’ candidate we’ve seen in decades and he was disregarded as a borderline communist - he was actually moderate left (his policies were in line with Scandinavian nation). Once again, the Overton window is to the right so even actual centrists are considered left wing - as you’ve just demonstrated. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I actually think most people are close to the centre but the extremes make more noise, and in the case of the far left have a disproportionate influence in the media and the arts. How are you defining ‘far left’? Far left (IMO) is communism. I’m not aware of any openly communist influences in the media or arts. The problem is that the Overton window in the U.K is to the right, which becomes increasingly obvious when people suggest that Starmer (centrist) is accused of being a socialist. Governments in the UK have been shifting further to the Left since 1997. In reality since then we have had a Continuity Blair Government the hallmarks of which have been: Mass immigration Bigger state control, regulation and expenditure with resultant economic stagnation Higher taxes Imperialist foreign escapades (often deluded) A belief that globalist and multinational interests should override the interests of the nation state and the wishes of the local populace. The current Labour government is just the final denouement of the Blairite uni party. Corbyn was the only genuine ‘left’ candidate we’ve seen in decades and he was disregarded as a borderline communist - he was actually moderate left (his policies were in line with Scandinavian nation). Once again, the Overton window is to the right so even actual centrists are considered left wing - as you’ve just demonstrated." Watching the right wing media totally lose their shit over him and some of the radical ideas such as the country taking back control of crucial infrastructure, services and steel production.. The latter funny enough seems less toxic now Farage has changed his mind and supports it now.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is a clear divide between the wealthy and the poor, and it’s bigger than it’s ever been - but this notion of ‘the masses’ coming together is flawed when certain political topics arise. Who will stand alongside those who believe that Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk are right? Or those who believe Russell Brand is some kind of victim of a plot to bring him down? Why would I stand alongside someone who believes that Trump is some kind of messiah? Extreme cases, yes - but chosen to illustrate a point. ‘There is more in common than divides us’ only works to a certain extent. " Not saying it's a panacea but it's a fact that we all at some level share common issues and expectations, wants for our kids etc.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is a clear divide between the wealthy and the poor, and it’s bigger than it’s ever been - but this notion of ‘the masses’ coming together is flawed when certain political topics arise. Who will stand alongside those who believe that Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk are right? Or those who believe Russell Brand is some kind of victim of a plot to bring him down? Why would I stand alongside someone who believes that Trump is some kind of messiah? Extreme cases, yes - but chosen to illustrate a point. ‘There is more in common than divides us’ only works to a certain extent. Not saying it's a panacea but it's a fact that we all at some level share common issues and expectations, wants for our kids etc.. " Yeah we absolutely all have the same basic needs, and we all want job security, holidays, public services etc - we can all get on board with that - but societal issues like race, religion, welfare, taxation levels/direction are always going to cause consternation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is a clear divide between the wealthy and the poor, and it’s bigger than it’s ever been - but this notion of ‘the masses’ coming together is flawed when certain political topics arise. Who will stand alongside those who believe that Yaxley-Lennon and his ilk are right? Or those who believe Russell Brand is some kind of victim of a plot to bring him down? Why would I stand alongside someone who believes that Trump is some kind of messiah? Extreme cases, yes - but chosen to illustrate a point. ‘There is more in common than divides us’ only works to a certain extent. Not saying it's a panacea but it's a fact that we all at some level share common issues and expectations, wants for our kids etc.. Yeah we absolutely all have the same basic needs, and we all want job security, holidays, public services etc - we can all get on board with that - but societal issues like race, religion, welfare, taxation levels/direction are always going to cause consternation. " If only we could take the emotional responses away from some of them.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I actually think most people are close to the centre but the extremes make more noise, and in the case of the far left have a disproportionate influence in the media and the arts. How are you defining ‘far left’? Far left (IMO) is communism. I’m not aware of any openly communist influences in the media or arts. The problem is that the Overton window in the U.K is to the right, which becomes increasingly obvious when people suggest that Starmer (centrist) is accused of being a socialist. Governments in the UK have been shifting further to the Left since 1997. In reality since then we have had a Continuity Blair Government the hallmarks of which have been: Mass immigration Bigger state control, regulation and expenditure with resultant economic stagnation Higher taxes Imperialist foreign escapades (often deluded) A belief that globalist and multinational interests should override the interests of the nation state and the wishes of the local populace. The current Labour government is just the final denouement of the Blairite uni party. Corbyn was the only genuine ‘left’ candidate we’ve seen in decades and he was disregarded as a borderline communist - he was actually moderate left (his policies were in line with Scandinavian nation). Once again, the Overton window is to the right so even actual centrists are considered left wing - as you’ve just demonstrated." One problem with left wing politics is the actual definitions and multitude of groups that fall under that banner. Marxist, communist, socialist, centre left, progressive, democratic socialist… the list goes on and on. That makes the “Overton window” argument a moving target, what seems centre left to one person might look hard left to another, depending on which branch of the left you have a foot in. Has the Overton window really shifted right, or has your own perspective drifted further left? Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. " So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I had an uncle and aunt. My aunt always voted for the party opposite to the one my uncle votes and pissed him off, even though he voted for different parties each election. Such relationships are basically unthinkable today." Absolutely not - so long as issues are discussed with respect, Tory voters and Labour voters for example could happily have a relationship and cancel each other’s votes out at elections. Could a left leaning individual have a relationship with someone on the far right? Or vice versa? Probably not, but it would be unlikely to occur in the first place. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 ) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I had an uncle and aunt. My aunt always voted for the party opposite to the one my uncle votes and pissed him off, even though he voted for different parties each election. Such relationships are basically unthinkable today. Absolutely not - so long as issues are discussed with respect, Tory voters and Labour voters for example could happily have a relationship and cancel each other’s votes out at elections. Could a left leaning individual have a relationship with someone on the far right? Or vice versa? Probably not, but it would be unlikely to occur in the first place." Many such relationships have existed and still do. Only nowadays people take their political views way too seriously. IMO it's the left that's notoriously guilty of it. I have come across numerous profiles on dating apps where they say they won't date anyone who voted Tory. They have this weird obsession of doing an ideological purity test they do on everyone. JK Rowling for example would be left wing/progressive in every other thing except the Trans issue. Labour donor, spends a lot of time and money on women's Safety, even went on to say that one of the most important characters of her works is Gay. Just because she didn't align with the left on the Trans issue, the left demonised her and the rest is history. Same with Richard Dawkins. Failed the ideological purity test of the left. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? " This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate." Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I had an uncle and aunt. My aunt always voted for the party opposite to the one my uncle votes and pissed him off, even though he voted for different parties each election. Such relationships are basically unthinkable today. Absolutely not - so long as issues are discussed with respect, Tory voters and Labour voters for example could happily have a relationship and cancel each other’s votes out at elections. Could a left leaning individual have a relationship with someone on the far right? Or vice versa? Probably not, but it would be unlikely to occur in the first place. Many such relationships have existed and still do. Only nowadays people take their political views way too seriously. IMO it's the left that's notoriously guilty of it. I have come across numerous profiles on dating apps where they say they won't date anyone who voted Tory. They have this weird obsession of doing an ideological purity test they do on everyone. JK Rowling for example would be left wing/progressive in every other thing except the Trans issue. Labour donor, spends a lot of time and money on women's Safety, even went on to say that one of the most important characters of her works is Gay. Just because she didn't align with the left on the Trans issue, the left demonised her and the rest is history. Same with Richard Dawkins. Failed the ideological purity test of the left." Who are ‘the left’? Explain further Should we discuss ‘the right’ where John Major is seen as some equivalent of Tommy Robinson? They’re both ‘the right’ are they not? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed)" Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I had an uncle and aunt. My aunt always voted for the party opposite to the one my uncle votes and pissed him off, even though he voted for different parties each election. Such relationships are basically unthinkable today. Absolutely not - so long as issues are discussed with respect, Tory voters and Labour voters for example could happily have a relationship and cancel each other’s votes out at elections. Could a left leaning individual have a relationship with someone on the far right? Or vice versa? Probably not, but it would be unlikely to occur in the first place. Many such relationships have existed and still do. Only nowadays people take their political views way too seriously. IMO it's the left that's notoriously guilty of it. I have come across numerous profiles on dating apps where they say they won't date anyone who voted Tory. They have this weird obsession of doing an ideological purity test they do on everyone. JK Rowling for example would be left wing/progressive in every other thing except the Trans issue. Labour donor, spends a lot of time and money on women's Safety, even went on to say that one of the most important characters of her works is Gay. Just because she didn't align with the left on the Trans issue, the left demonised her and the rest is history. Same with Richard Dawkins. Failed the ideological purity test of the left." This does at least explain why people think Starmer is a socialist. They can’t tell moderate left from communist - the left are a hive mind who all think alike, apparently. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate." Ah I see - you incorrectly associate socialism with extremism. Yes, Corbyn is a socialist. He’s also a moderate. The two are entirely compatible. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I had an uncle and aunt. My aunt always voted for the party opposite to the one my uncle votes and pissed him off, even though he voted for different parties each election. Such relationships are basically unthinkable today. Absolutely not - so long as issues are discussed with respect, Tory voters and Labour voters for example could happily have a relationship and cancel each other’s votes out at elections. Could a left leaning individual have a relationship with someone on the far right? Or vice versa? Probably not, but it would be unlikely to occur in the first place. Many such relationships have existed and still do. Only nowadays people take their political views way too seriously. IMO it's the left that's notoriously guilty of it. I have come across numerous profiles on dating apps where they say they won't date anyone who voted Tory. They have this weird obsession of doing an ideological purity test they do on everyone. JK Rowling for example would be left wing/progressive in every other thing except the Trans issue. Labour donor, spends a lot of time and money on women's Safety, even went on to say that one of the most important characters of her works is Gay. Just because she didn't align with the left on the Trans issue, the left demonised her and the rest is history. Same with Richard Dawkins. Failed the ideological purity test of the left. Who are ‘the left’? Explain further Should we discuss ‘the right’ where John Major is seen as some equivalent of Tommy Robinson? They’re both ‘the right’ are they not? " I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. I have never seen a single profile that says they won't talk with a Labour voter, but numerous profiles which say that they wouldn't meet a Tory voter. And how many left wingers today would openly admit that JK Rowling is not as bad and consider her left wing? The ideological purity test done by the left is nothing different than what religious cults do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed)" 'Immensely popular' 🤣🤣🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate." The reason you think Corbyn is not moderate is because of the Overton window sitting firmly centre right in the UK. (It’s even further right in the US where Biden was called a socialist). It’s a societal issue, and a fundamental lack of understanding and political nous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) 'Immensely popular' 🤣🤣🤣" Feel free to do some research. Blind polling had large support for the 2017 labour manifesto. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate. Ah I see - you incorrectly associate socialism with extremism. Yes, Corbyn is a socialist. He’s also a moderate. The two are entirely compatible. " Moderates agree on some left wing and some right wing ideas. Moderates don't call themselves socialist. There is a difference between saying "I agree with some socialist ideas" and saying "I am a socialist". You could argue that Corbyn is center left but he is definitely not a moderate | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate. Ah I see - you incorrectly associate socialism with extremism. Yes, Corbyn is a socialist. He’s also a moderate. The two are entirely compatible. Moderates agree on some left wing and some right wing ideas. Moderates don't call themselves socialist. There is a difference between saying "I agree with some socialist ideas" and saying "I am a socialist". You could argue that Corbyn is center left but he is definitely not a moderate" Centre left is the very definition of moderate. Centrist is centrist. Centre right is also moderate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate. Ah I see - you incorrectly associate socialism with extremism. Yes, Corbyn is a socialist. He’s also a moderate. The two are entirely compatible. Moderates agree on some left wing and some right wing ideas. Moderates don't call themselves socialist. There is a difference between saying "I agree with some socialist ideas" and saying "I am a socialist". You could argue that Corbyn is center left but he is definitely not a moderate Centre left is the very definition of moderate. Centrist is centrist. Centre right is also moderate. " Cool. Will you agree that the Tories are moderates then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The left-right spectrum thing is a bit complictated because there are many analytical political models using a variety of different dimensions. However there is a certain amount of alignment so we might still simplify things down to one crude dimension that is mainly focused on economic structure: With complete top-down state control of everything and no wealth variation allowed on the far-left compared with complete individual autonomy, zero-tax and no business regulation on the far-right. In the UK pretty much everyone has been in the centre ground. Describing Corbyn as being on the hard-left is as bonkers as describing Thatcher as being on the hard-right. They had very different positions but still ought to be described as centre-left and centre-right. " I agree. But I think there is also some nuance between what a politician's ideals are and what the politician's policies are. A politician could be hard left or hard right, but adapt their policies towards centre-left and centre-right to make themselves more electable. One could make a case that both Thatcher and Corbyn fall into this category. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree. But I think there is also some nuance between what a politician's ideals are and what the politician's policies are. A politician could be hard left or hard right, but adapt their policies towards centre-left and centre-right to make themselves more electable. One could make a case that both Thatcher and Corbyn fall into this category." What's the case for arguing that Thatcher was hard-right? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The left-right spectrum thing is a bit complictated because there are many analytical political models using a variety of different dimensions. However there is a certain amount of alignment so we might still simplify things down to one crude dimension that is mainly focused on economic structure: With complete top-down state control of everything and no wealth variation allowed on the far-left compared with complete individual autonomy, zero-tax and no business regulation on the far-right. In the UK pretty much everyone has been in the centre ground. Describing Corbyn as being on the hard-left is as bonkers as describing Thatcher as being on the hard-right. They had very different positions but still ought to be described as centre-left and centre-right. I agree. But I think there is also some nuance between what a politician's ideals are and what the politician's policies are. A politician could be hard left or hard right, but adapt their policies towards centre-left and centre-right to make themselves more electable. One could make a case that both Thatcher and Corbyn fall into this category." In the words of the iron lady; No no no no | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree. But I think there is also some nuance between what a politician's ideals are and what the politician's policies are. A politician could be hard left or hard right, but adapt their policies towards centre-left and centre-right to make themselves more electable. One could make a case that both Thatcher and Corbyn fall into this category. What's the case for arguing that Thatcher was hard-right?" Not in the social aspect. But definitely in the economic aspect. Some of her quotes "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money" "If a Tory does not believe that private property is one of the main bulwarks of individual freedom, then he had better become a socialist and have done with it" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thatcher won three general elections and was a transformational and historic national leader. Corbyn lost two elections and had an allotment. If we want a serious discussion can we make serious comparisons." Not putting them on the same footing. Just pointing out that politicians' personal ideals could be different from their policies | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not in the social aspect. But definitely in the economic aspect. Some of her quotes "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people’s money" "If a Tory does not believe that private property is one of the main bulwarks of individual freedom, then he had better become a socialist and have done with it"" Even in the infamous Women's Own interview she didn't actually promote a far-right viewpoint (using the definition I described earlier)... "They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours." Thatcher was a rubbish orator and struggled with rhetoric but I think she was trying to say that people should strive to be autonomous but she still conceded that we should also look after our neighbours. Nigel Lawson's definition of Thatcherism seems accurate... "[A] mixture of free markets, financial discipline, firm control over public expenditure, tax cuts, nationalism, "Victorian values" (of the Samuel Smiles self-help variety), privatisation and a dash of populism." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Corbyn is hard left, and if you think he is moderate it would make sense. So Scandinavian soc-dem is hard-left, in your opinion? Where would you place communism? This is going some way to cement my point about the breadth of left wing views. Scandinavian model I believe, relies on strong private sectors, high productivity, and competitive markets to fund their welfare system. Corbyn was all for nationalisation, did not believe in free trade and no fan of the EU, anti NATO, and a took a dim view of capitalism. Go a touch further and you have communism. A much more informed person on left wing theory would pick that apart rather easily, however I think it shows that Corbyn wasn't a moderate. Corbyn is in favour of nationalisation of key industries, is he not? He also said we should remain in a customs union with the EU. That’s a long chalk from communism - which is too often lumped in with socialism as one mass. Corbyn’s 2017 manifesto was essentially Scandinavian soc-dem. (It was also immensely popular when polices were polled with party association removed) Corbyn called himself a socialist. I don't know why you are trying to portray him as moderate. Ah I see - you incorrectly associate socialism with extremism. Yes, Corbyn is a socialist. He’s also a moderate. The two are entirely compatible. Moderates agree on some left wing and some right wing ideas. Moderates don't call themselves socialist. There is a difference between saying "I agree with some socialist ideas" and saying "I am a socialist". You could argue that Corbyn is center left but he is definitely not a moderate Centre left is the very definition of moderate. Centrist is centrist. Centre right is also moderate. Cool. Will you agree that the Tories are moderates then?" Generally the Tories have been moderate, with occasional and recent leaders who demonstrate less moderate ideals - Badenoch is an example. Cameron, Major were both moderates. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thatcher won three general elections and was a transformational and historic national leader. Corbyn lost two elections and had an allotment. If we want a serious discussion can we make serious comparisons." Thatcher’s policies also caused hardship for many and our present social housing crisis can be traced back directly to her policy. Like all leaders, your opinion of them will be dominated by how you barely survived or thrived under them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are." The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. " You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter." Oh well, that’s definitive then, isn’t it? I’ve actually explained the reason I won’t meet Tories on fabs - but I’m actually very fond of heated debate with Tories at work, in my friend group etc. I can’t think of anything worse than having a fabs meet ruined by an argument about politics, can you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter." There is plenty of research showing people on the left are significantly less tolerant of others political opinions than those on the right, especially younger people. After Brexit there was a poll showing Remain voters were twice less open to forming relationships with Leave voters than the reverse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter. There is plenty of research showing people on the left are significantly less tolerant of others political opinions than those on the right, especially younger people. After Brexit there was a poll showing Remain voters were twice less open to forming relationships with Leave voters than the reverse." Ah so you’re not averse to looking at research, but scoff when others present points that research has revealed? (Like the popularity of Corbyn’s manifesto, for example) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter. Oh well, that’s definitive then, isn’t it? I’ve actually explained the reason I won’t meet Tories on fabs - but I’m actually very fond of heated debate with Tories at work, in my friend group etc. I can’t think of anything worse than having a fabs meet ruined by an argument about politics, can you? " Would you ever date a Tory? If you can't even have a fab meet with someone with opposite political opinion, I don't think you can actually have a relationship with one | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter. There is plenty of research showing people on the left are significantly less tolerant of others political opinions than those on the right, especially younger people. After Brexit there was a poll showing Remain voters were twice less open to forming relationships with Leave voters than the reverse." Yes, even at my work, it's the remainers who are so serious about it and would treat any leave voter as a demon. I have never seen any leave voter do the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not saying everyone in the left are like that but a vast majority of them are. The *vast* majority? I’m on the left and can assure you that the mentalists are very much a minority. What you’ve just said is the equivalent of me claiming that the vast majority on the right want the Royal Navy to sink small boats crossing the channel. You said that you have written in your own profile that you won't meet Tories. I have historically come across numerous profiles here and other apps saying they won't meet Tories. I am yet to see a single one who wrote they wouldn't meet a labour voter. Oh well, that’s definitive then, isn’t it? I’ve actually explained the reason I won’t meet Tories on fabs - but I’m actually very fond of heated debate with Tories at work, in my friend group etc. I can’t think of anything worse than having a fabs meet ruined by an argument about politics, can you? Would you ever date a Tory? If you can't even have a fab meet with someone with opposite political opinion, I don't think you can actually have a relationship with one" I married one  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. " Where’s that thread about ‘woke’? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I see the Attorney General Hermer has had to apologise for calling those who want to leave the ECHR equivalent to the Nazis. It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. It’s good that he has been forced to apologise. A lot of Leftist politicians seem to be stuck in the past, thinking that they can control discussion through the tired old “racist” and “Nazi” slurs." Didn't David Lammy say Brexit supporters were worse than Nazis ? I guess just being Nazis is an improvement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I see the Attorney General Hermer has had to apologise for calling those who want to leave the ECHR equivalent to the Nazis. It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. It’s good that he has been forced to apologise. A lot of Leftist politicians seem to be stuck in the past, thinking that they can control discussion through the tired old “racist” and “Nazi” slurs." Anyone interested in the truth rather than scoring cheap points should perhaps check the transcript of the Royal United Services Institute lecture and read the arguments made in regard to romantic idealists and pseudo-realists for themselves. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/attorney-generals-2025-rusi-annual-security-lecture | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I see the Attorney General Hermer has had to apologise for calling those who want to leave the ECHR equivalent to the Nazis. It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. It’s good that he has been forced to apologise. A lot of Leftist politicians seem to be stuck in the past, thinking that they can control discussion through the tired old “racist” and “Nazi” slurs. Didn't David Lammy say Brexit supporters were worse than Nazis ? I guess just being Nazis is an improvement." And on the effects of comic relief ‘ the world doesn’t need any more white saviours’ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I see the Attorney General Hermer has had to apologise for calling those who want to leave the ECHR equivalent to the Nazis. It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. It’s good that he has been forced to apologise. A lot of Leftist politicians seem to be stuck in the past, thinking that they can control discussion through the tired old “racist” and “Nazi” slurs. Didn't David Lammy say Brexit supporters were worse than Nazis ? I guess just being Nazis is an improvement." Didn’t he say that about the ERG members specifically? Not defending his words, but let’s not spread misinformation eh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not sure what the point of this line of argument is about personal relationships. Is the proposition that right-wingers will fuck anyone but left-wingers are more picky? Everyone has their own criteria for who they find attractive. I'm happy to chat with virtually anyone who isn't screaming invective at me but I'm not going to engage in intimate sexual relations with just anyone. I would expect that this is true just as much for right-wingers as left-wingers. " It's a discussion about division among people on politics lines being much bigger today than in the past. It's not about sex. My personal experience has been that it's usually the left who seem to avoid friendship or any other kind of relationship with people who are right wing. They have the right to do it, of course. But this results in echo chambers.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I see the Attorney General Hermer has had to apologise for calling those who want to leave the ECHR equivalent to the Nazis. It always seems to be the Left who are quick to engage in name calling, trying to shut down debate. It’s good that he has been forced to apologise. A lot of Leftist politicians seem to be stuck in the past, thinking that they can control discussion through the tired old “racist” and “Nazi” slurs. Anyone interested in the truth rather than scoring cheap points should perhaps check the transcript of the Royal United Services Institute lecture and read the arguments made in regard to romantic idealists and pseudo-realists for themselves. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/attorney-generals-2025-rusi-annual-security-lecture " He has apologised but said nothing wrong? Seems odd. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I highly recommend that people read Richard Hermer's RUSI lecture. The claim that he called anyone a Nazi is politically motivated garbage. It's a very thoughtful and important speech. " He clearly implied that those who wish to change international law (Tories and Reform) were comparable to the Nazi jurist Carl Smitt. Without using the N word his clumsy intention was obvious, hence the apology. It seems likely Hermer won't last long in his role, not least as Starmer and Yvette Cooper would very much like to ammend some international law themselves. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I highly recommend that people read Richard Hermer's RUSI lecture. The claim that he called anyone a Nazi is politically motivated garbage. It's a very thoughtful and important speech. He clearly implied that those who wish to change international law (Tories and Reform) were comparable to the Nazi jurist Carl Smitt. Without using the N word his clumsy intention was obvious, hence the apology. It seems likely Hermer won't last long in his role, not least as Starmer and Yvette Cooper would very much like to ammend some international law themselves." The tool box seems to be full of tools for human rights lawyers to use against the home office. But contains little or no tools for a democratically elected government to use to defend its borders. And a unelected, sitting judge who’s been there’s for decades and is seemingly impossible to remove, wields there own political views unhindered. This happens regardless of which party is in power. The people see the headlines of convicted sex offenders whom the home office want to deport, but some smart arse barrister has put together an argument that he knows will sway a leftie judge, and wins. This is also dividing the nation with some saying “well the law is the law” and others saying “if this is the law, the law is wrong” The UCHR has lots of very important protections for people’s civil and human rights. But if it’s being used to protect child sex offenders from being returned to their home country, the d suggest it needs looking at. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He has apologised but said nothing wrong? Seems odd." That's because he hasn't apologised. According to the BBC... A spokesperson for Lord Hermer said he rejected "the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives". But they added the Labour peer "acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference". This is standard diplomatic speak that translates to "the Tories are wrong and shrugs". I very much doubt that either Badenoch or Tice have actually read the speech. If they had then they might have tried to address the arguments made rather than indulge in a crude knee-jerk attempt at deflection. How is anyone supposed to make a long speech about the historical, political and legal aspects of a convention that came as a response to WWII without mentioning anything to do with WWII? If critics want to be taken seriously they should make the effort to read the whole speech and try to string together a reasoned response to the points made rather than engage in empty hyperbole. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I highly recommend that people read Richard Hermer's RUSI lecture. The claim that he called anyone a Nazi is politically motivated garbage. It's a very thoughtful and important speech. He clearly implied that those who wish to change international law (Tories and Reform) were comparable to the Nazi jurist Carl Smitt. Without using the N word his clumsy intention was obvious, hence the apology. It seems likely Hermer won't last long in his role, not least as Starmer and Yvette Cooper would very much like to ammend some international law themselves. The tool box seems to be full of tools for human rights lawyers to use against the home office. But contains little or no tools for a democratically elected government to use to defend its borders. And a unelected, sitting judge who’s been there’s for decades and is seemingly impossible to remove, wields there own political views unhindered. This happens regardless of which party is in power. The people see the headlines of convicted sex offenders whom the home office want to deport, but some smart arse barrister has put together an argument that he knows will sway a leftie judge, and wins. This is also dividing the nation with some saying “well the law is the law” and others saying “if this is the law, the law is wrong” The UCHR has lots of very important protections for people’s civil and human rights. But if it’s being used to protect child sex offenders from being returned to their home country, the d suggest it needs looking at. " Many European Governments are becoming very frustrated at their inability to deal effectively with illegal and criminal migration, and Labour are in the same position. Even Jack Straw, a former Lab Home Secretary, recently said he thought these issues could be handled by domestic Governments with no need for the ECHR to intervene. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many European Governments are becoming very frustrated at their inability to deal effectively with illegal and criminal migration, and Labour are in the same position. Even Jack Straw, a former Lab Home Secretary, recently said he thought these issues could be handled by domestic Governments with no need for the ECHR to intervene." Joshua Rozenberg's substack discusses this.. https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/who-needs-it The reason that the Attorney General brought up Carl Schmitt in the lecture was closely related to this as Schmitt's 1920's writing on the State of Exception (Ausnahmezustand) was about the philosophical and legal notion that a sovereign power should be able to ignore the rule of law in certain circumstances. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
