Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?

[0000]

durbster said:

This notion that left-wing politics leads to inevitable failure is easily addressed by pointing to the various countries around the world that have more left-leaning policies and yet are doing as well as, if not better than us.

Where were you thinking of?

durbster said:

And the continued inferrence that it was left-wing economics that caused the 2008 crash is a bit odd but I guess if you keep saying it people will believe it.

Was it bankers?

durbster said:

I'm not convinced I'm going to like politics of ideology but can it be worse than the varying shades of grey we've endured for the last 20 years?

Should be far more interesting. I can't see it getting enough votes to matter though.

[turbobloke]

This is getting a bit off-topic again but some points made ask for a response and responses are us.

durbster said:

This notion that left-wing politics leads to inevitable failure is easily addressed by pointing to the various countries around the world that have more left-leaning policies and yet are doing as well as, if not better than us.

The point made about fsilure is about the UK over the last 50 years, but if you can post up a non-capitalist dominated left-wing success story where a socialist economy does the business on great tractor production numbers and filling in recently dug holes, go for it.

durbster said:

And the continued inferrence that it was left-wing economics that caused the 2008 crash is a bit odd but I guess if you keep saying it people will believe it.

That use of the word 'caused' doesn't reflect the nature of the posts to which you refer. The failure of Brown's tripartite regulatory system is alluded to, as a key factor on the UK side. PH threads about the crunch and crash rightly refer to other factors including Clinton and Achtenberg (causal) and ratings agencies. It's the Left which is more into singular blame statements, involving bankers only. Wrong.

Left-wing economics, where Gordon Brown went native around 2001 (after mostly sticking to the Tory plot since 1997) by opening the taps again when he reverted to type with increased government spending, meant that there was less room for maneouvre when the fan was hit. It shouldn't have happened as Gordo had aboloshed boom and bust - in his own mind only, wrong again.

durbster said:

I'm not convinced I'm going to like politics of ideology but can it be worse than the varying shades of grey we've endured for the last 20 years?

It ought to provide some memorable PMQs and if it doesn't then I suspect quite a few people will want their £3 back.

[Randy Winkman]

fblm said:

Randy Winkman said:

But everywhere except PH, they are "right wingers".

Wonderful, the only problem being they're not. They're racists with a side helping of socialist. The clue is in the name.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/26/far-right-europe-election_n_5391873.html

Some far-right parties.

[turbobloke]

Randy Winkman said:

fblm said:

Randy Winkman said:

But everywhere except PH, they are "right wingers".

Wonderful, the only problem being they're not. They're racists with a side helping of socialist. The clue is in the name.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/26/far-right-europe-election_n_5391873.html

Some far-right parties.

Thanks for the link but it's still not a matter of tolerating the existence of other political views as per the OP. The same could be said for the anti-corporatism and/or anti-globalisation of green-red politics where protesters of a certain political persuasion demonstrate against a particular issue, rather than railing against the existence of opposing political viewpoints which are then obscenely vilified on placards and by vandalising buildings, monuments and property. Some people can't tolerate lactose, is that next

[Randy Winkman]

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the link but it's still not a matter of tolerating the existence of other political views as per the OP. The same could be said for the anti-corporatism and/or anti-globalisation of green-red politics where protesters of a certain political persuasion demonstrate against a particular issue, rather than railing against the existence of opposing political viewpoints which are then obscenely vilified on placards and by vandalising buildings, monuments and property. Some people can't tolerate lactose, is that next

I must be thick - I've got no idea what you're talking about.

[otolith]

There is a circular argument there.

"The right wing is intolerant too"
"Why is that?"
"Some right wing people are nasty racists"
"Their policies are mostly left wing, on what basis are they right wing?"
"Because they are nasty racists"

This goes away if you don't try to collapse economics and authoritarianism into the same scalar value.

[turbobloke]

Randy Winkman said:

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the link but it's still not a matter of tolerating the existence of other political views as per the OP. The same could be said for the anti-corporatism and/or anti-globalisation of green-red politics where protesters of a certain political persuasion demonstrate against a particular issue, rather than railing against the existence of opposing political viewpoints which are then obscenely vilified on placards and by vandalising buildings, monuments and property. Some people can't tolerate lactose, is that next

I must be thick - I've got no idea what you're talking about.

Good response.

otolith said:

There is a circular argument there.

"The right wing is intolerant too"
"Why is that?"
"Some right wing people are nasty racists"
"Their policies are mostly left wing, on what basis are they right wing?"
"Because they are nasty racists"

Quite so, but there is still a fundamental error in what's being offered. The thread OP is about prevalence not occurrence and about intolerance based purely on others' views.

It's not about any extremist intolerance of race or skin colour or any single issue aspect of any wingism.

A counterpoint would have to be about the Right and their intolerance of Leftist views (see OP) such that it involved overreaction and vile bile and vandalism by abusive slogans merely as a result of anything from a FB 'like' to an election result.

Such intolerance of others from the general Right due to those others having differing views is far less prevalent to the point of being more difficult to locate examples.

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their deomomstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

[otolith]

turbobloke said:

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their deomomstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

"The Labour party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - H Wilson

If you think that your politics are a moral crusade, it's a small step to thinking that those who disagree with you are immoral.

[turbobloke]

otolith said:

turbobloke said:

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their demonstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

"The Labour party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - H Wilson

If you think that your politics are a moral crusade, it's a small step to thinking that those who disagree with you are immoral.

And another small step to thinking they're evil scum, apparently, conveying the inalienable right to scrawl such erroneous sentiments all over cars, buildings and memorials.

After Wilson, Lord Donoughue discussing his fellow lefties:

"...a feeling of moral superiority, which is a characteristic of many middle and professional types on the left..."

[Randy Winkman]

otolith said:

There is a circular argument there.

"The right wing is intolerant too"
"Why is that?"
"Some right wing people are nasty racists"
"Their policies are mostly left wing, on what basis are they right wing?"
"Because they are nasty racists"

This goes away if you don't try to collapse economics and authoritarianism into the same scalar value.

Only in the weird world of PH are those people anything other than "right wing". The PH argument seems to be that they are nasty so they must be left-wing cos everything left wing is bad. But the pompous moral and itellectual superiority here gets in the way of that.

[turbobloke]

Randy Winkman said:

otolith said:

There is a circular argument there.

"The right wing is intolerant too"
"Why is that?"
"Some right wing people are nasty racists"
"Their policies are mostly left wing, on what basis are they right wing?"
"Because they are nasty racists"

This goes away if you don't try to collapse economics and authoritarianism into the same scalar value.

Only in the weird world of PH are those people anything other than "right wing". The PH argument seems to be that they are nasty so they must be left-wing cos everything left wing is bad.

Those people - all of them?
They are nasty - all of them?
Everything left wing is bad - all of it?

The only time I've read anything like that is in your post (above). It's an inapplicable set of generalisations as far as PH goes. Assuming victim status to invite sympathy somehow?

Randy Winkman said:

But the pompous moral and itellectual superiority here gets in the way of that.

Moral superiority of the Left? (Wilson, Donoughue self-confessions)

It's still about prevalence of intolerance towards others merely for holding opposing views, not some overall mass dismissal of any views.

[Randy Winkman]

turbobloke said:

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their deomomstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

I'd rather the right wing zieg heil types just disliked people for holding a different view than that they had Nazi marches and beat up people for being the wrong colour.

[otolith]

Randy Winkman said:

Only in the weird world of PH are those people anything other than "right wing". The PH argument seems to be that they are nasty so they must be left-wing cos everything left wing is bad. But the pompous moral and itellectual superiority here gets in the way of that.

No, the argument is that it makes far more sense to look at authoritarianism separately from economics, because the two are not related. Otherwise you have the horseshoe effect where the ends of the left/right spectrum curve round to meet each other.

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

[turbobloke]

Randy Winkman said:

turbobloke said:

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their demonstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

I'd rather the right wing zieg heil types just disliked people for holding a different view than that they had Nazi marches and beat up people for being the wrong colour.

I oppose racism totally and I'm not that keen on the stupidity and futility of thinking that those holding different views are evil scum purely for that reason, it tends to incite criminal damage and interpersonal violence including attacks based on colour of clothing (blue).

http://www.ibtimes.com/london-protests-violence-fe...

"Following the Conservative Party's victory in the U.K. general elections...five people have been arrested and four officers have been injured during an anti-austerity and anti-Conservative protests that erupted Saturday in the United Kingdom."

http://www.rt.com/in-motion/257289-uk-anti-conserv...

https://youtu.be/Rk1f2DDTVNQ



As to right wingism in this context it's already been dealt with.

otolith said:

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 15th September 15:24

[FredClogs]

otolith said:

No, the argument is that it makes far more sense to look at authoritarianism separately from economics, because the two are not related. Otherwise you have the horseshoe effect where the ends of the left/right spectrum curve round to meet each other.

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

You're absolutely correct, but the thread title makes a clear assertion, left wing (economically) people are more authoritarian and less tolerant - discuss. Which is of course not true.

The Nazi party and the whole Third Reich was a personality cult, as most authoritarian leaderships are, especially fascist ones. Most Monarchs/religious leaders/totalitarians through history either ruled through a combination of pop psychology and fear or personality cult. Thatcherism was a personality cult.

[turbobloke]

FredClogs said:

otolith said:

No, the argument is that it makes far more sense to look at authoritarianism separately from economics, because the two are not related. Otherwise you have the horseshoe effect where the ends of the left/right spectrum curve round to meet each other.

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

You're absolutely correct, but the thread title makes a clear assertion, left wing (economically) people are more authoritarian and less tolerant - discuss. Which is of course not true.

Except that it doesn't do that so the rest is moot.

The thread title doesn't suggest that the left (economically) are more authoritarian and less tolerant - that may or may not be true but it's another, separate and more general matter.

There is intolerance on the Left and Right for sure but the OP is clearly about prevalence not occurrence and only in the context of intolerance of the political views of others.

[Randy Winkman]

otolith said:

Randy Winkman said:

Only in the weird world of PH are those people anything other than "right wing". The PH argument seems to be that they are nasty so they must be left-wing cos everything left wing is bad. But the pompous moral and itellectual superiority here gets in the way of that.

No, the argument is that it makes far more sense to look at authoritarianism separately from economics, because the two are not related. Otherwise you have the horseshoe effect where the ends of the left/right spectrum curve round to meet each other.

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

Yet another Telegraph link to back up a PHers viewpoint. Why don't Telegraph links get dismissed in the same way Guardian ones are?

[Randy Winkman]

turbobloke said:

Randy Winkman said:

turbobloke said:

The OP isn't about occurrence of intolerance in general, however odious, it's about the Left and their demonstrably greater intolerance of others merely for holding a different view.

I'd rather the right wing zieg heil types just disliked people for holding a different view than that they had Nazi marches and beat up people for being the wrong colour.

I oppose racism totally and I'm not that keen on the stupidity and futility of thinking that those holding different views are evil scum purely for that reason, it tends to incite criminal damage and interpersonal violence including attacks based on colour of clothing (blue).

http://www.ibtimes.com/london-protests-violence-fe...

"Following the Conservative Party's victory in the U.K. general elections...five people have been arrested and four officers have been injured during an anti-austerity and anti-Conservative protests that erupted Saturday in the United Kingdom."

http://www.rt.com/in-motion/257289-uk-anti-conserv...

https://youtu.be/Rk1f2DDTVNQ



As to right wingism in this context it's already been dealt with.

otolith said:

It's not a novel concept, or one unique to "the weird world of PH".

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...

Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 15th September 15:24

For some weird technical reason I cant just quote your new post. Anyway, the fact that you are not racist doesn't stop those nasty racist people being regarded as right wing. It's just the way it is.

[turbobloke]

This is going round in circles; the attempted defence by generalisation from prevalence of intolerance of others' views to occurrence of other forms of intolerance has already been exposed and isn't going to work because it's inapplicable.

[crankedup]

otolith said:

crankedup said:

Shame that so many young people can't afford to by those ten ex council houses, and if they were still available to rent from the council maybe that would be ten families housed in a proper house rather then B&B.

But the waiting list would be ten places longer, because the ten families currently living in the ten ex-council houses would now need council houses too. You haven't thought this through.

Yes of course ten families live in ten houses, they still live in them therefore those houses are not available for new tenants.

What I am pointing out is this, those ten houses will never be available to ten more families for renting from the council, that is the point.

Further to that, Thatcher stopped those forced council house sales revenues being re-invested in new stock. Thus depriving those of lower income availability of a council house to rent from the council.

See, I have thought it through.