Why can't the UK left wing unite?
Discussion
Firstly I'm not a leftie. I'm centre right.
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
Because their politics are sufficiently different to prevent any meaningful unity. The common enemy is not horrific enough to get them to accept their differences. A lot of the "drive" in the left is underpinned by identity politics, which makes it really hard to co-operate.
IMO a lot of the "right" is actually made up of people who aren't really political, but do want an opportunity to live their lives in whatever way they want to. They'll get excited about decent schools, tax rates and the NHS - if they have those things they are happy. Within those limits, they'll cheerfully rub along with people who mostly agree, but differ completely as regards the implementation.
You could see this in the whole Corbyn/Momentum thing - it absolutely electrified the party, but rapidly purged it of anyone who remotely disagreed with the details. You had lifelong, genuine Labour politicians being hounded out for daring to suggest that the country might not be ready for full on Marxism. At the same time, the voters of the "Red Wall" got bored of hysterical student politics and voted Conservative.
IMO a lot of the "right" is actually made up of people who aren't really political, but do want an opportunity to live their lives in whatever way they want to. They'll get excited about decent schools, tax rates and the NHS - if they have those things they are happy. Within those limits, they'll cheerfully rub along with people who mostly agree, but differ completely as regards the implementation.
You could see this in the whole Corbyn/Momentum thing - it absolutely electrified the party, but rapidly purged it of anyone who remotely disagreed with the details. You had lifelong, genuine Labour politicians being hounded out for daring to suggest that the country might not be ready for full on Marxism. At the same time, the voters of the "Red Wall" got bored of hysterical student politics and voted Conservative.
OP claims to be centre right. By the end of page one he will be called "alt-right" or even a fascist. If we can set aside the inability of some posters to differentiate between the politics of Ted Heath and Adolf Hitler, let's proceed.
A problem with the left IMHO is that the ideological divides broadly cleave it 'lengthways' for want of a better word, where the right is broadly split 'crossways'. Let me explain that a bit better.
The old left is very concerned with the working class and the plight of traditional industries, but is also patriotic. Mirror readers, in short.
The new left is far more worried about identity politics and environmental issues, and is concerned with foreign policy issues to an extent that can seem like hatred of their nation (this not just a UK phenomenon). Guardian readers in other words.
But you can be centre left or hard left and still belong to one of these broad strands, which have irreconcilable differences, on for example, the coal industry or nuclear-armed submarines.
The right on the other hand is more noticeably split ideologically between centre and hard right.
The centre right is normally socially liberal but also economically liberal in the traditional sense of a belief in the market.
The far right is usually very socially conservative, but also often very economically conservative. In many ways more like the old hard left, but with added xenophobia.
(There is the wrinkle of right-wing Tories like JRM, but they still are far more ideologically close to the centre than the far right, as a belief in the market and freedom of expression arememphatically not values of the far right)
The two wings of thought rarely have much in common. Therefore its very easy to unite the right, as the vast majority of people that consider themselves right wing are centre right.
Whereas the left, being composed of broadly equal numbers of voters of two very different types is much harder to unify for long.
And no, I don't want to see your political compass.
A problem with the left IMHO is that the ideological divides broadly cleave it 'lengthways' for want of a better word, where the right is broadly split 'crossways'. Let me explain that a bit better.
The old left is very concerned with the working class and the plight of traditional industries, but is also patriotic. Mirror readers, in short.
The new left is far more worried about identity politics and environmental issues, and is concerned with foreign policy issues to an extent that can seem like hatred of their nation (this not just a UK phenomenon). Guardian readers in other words.
But you can be centre left or hard left and still belong to one of these broad strands, which have irreconcilable differences, on for example, the coal industry or nuclear-armed submarines.
The right on the other hand is more noticeably split ideologically between centre and hard right.
The centre right is normally socially liberal but also economically liberal in the traditional sense of a belief in the market.
The far right is usually very socially conservative, but also often very economically conservative. In many ways more like the old hard left, but with added xenophobia.
(There is the wrinkle of right-wing Tories like JRM, but they still are far more ideologically close to the centre than the far right, as a belief in the market and freedom of expression arememphatically not values of the far right)
The two wings of thought rarely have much in common. Therefore its very easy to unite the right, as the vast majority of people that consider themselves right wing are centre right.
Whereas the left, being composed of broadly equal numbers of voters of two very different types is much harder to unify for long.
And no, I don't want to see your political compass.
Johnnytheboy said:
OP claims to be centre right. By the end of page one he will be called "alt-right" or even a fascist. If we can set aside the inability of some posters to differentiate between the politics of Ted Heath and Adolf Hitler, let's proceed.
A problem with the left IMHO is that the ideological divides broadly cleave it 'lengthways' for want of a better word, where the right is broadly split 'crossways'. Let me explain that a bit better.
The old left is very concerned with the working class and the plight of traditional industries, but is also patriotic. Mirror readers, in short.
The new left is far more worried about identity politics and environmental issues, and is concerned with foreign policy issues to an extent that can seem like hatred of their nation (this not just a UK phenomenon). Guardian readers in other words.
But you can be centre left or hard left and still belong to one of these broad strands, which have irreconcilable differences, on for example, the coal industry or nuclear-armed submarines.
The right on the other hand is more noticeably split ideologically between centre and hard right.
The centre right is normally socially liberal but also economically liberal in the traditional sense of a belief in the market.
The far right is usually very socially conservative, but also often very economically conservative. In many ways more like the old hard left, but with added xenophobia.
(There is the wrinkle of right-wing Tories like JRM, but they still are far more ideologically close to the centre than the far right, as a belief in the market and freedom of expression arememphatically not values of the far right)
The two wings of thought rarely have much in common. Therefore its very easy to unite the right, as the vast majority of people that consider themselves right wing are centre right.
Whereas the left, being composed of broadly equal numbers of voters of two very different types is much harder to unify for long.
And no, I don't want to see your political compass.
Succinctly defines modern politics and why most people don't fit the existing brackets.A problem with the left IMHO is that the ideological divides broadly cleave it 'lengthways' for want of a better word, where the right is broadly split 'crossways'. Let me explain that a bit better.
The old left is very concerned with the working class and the plight of traditional industries, but is also patriotic. Mirror readers, in short.
The new left is far more worried about identity politics and environmental issues, and is concerned with foreign policy issues to an extent that can seem like hatred of their nation (this not just a UK phenomenon). Guardian readers in other words.
But you can be centre left or hard left and still belong to one of these broad strands, which have irreconcilable differences, on for example, the coal industry or nuclear-armed submarines.
The right on the other hand is more noticeably split ideologically between centre and hard right.
The centre right is normally socially liberal but also economically liberal in the traditional sense of a belief in the market.
The far right is usually very socially conservative, but also often very economically conservative. In many ways more like the old hard left, but with added xenophobia.
(There is the wrinkle of right-wing Tories like JRM, but they still are far more ideologically close to the centre than the far right, as a belief in the market and freedom of expression arememphatically not values of the far right)
The two wings of thought rarely have much in common. Therefore its very easy to unite the right, as the vast majority of people that consider themselves right wing are centre right.
Whereas the left, being composed of broadly equal numbers of voters of two very different types is much harder to unify for long.
And no, I don't want to see your political compass.
I should have added that the old left is in decline, the new left in ascendancy.
But the old left tend to be older voters, ie they go out and vote.
So a left wing party has to continue to appeal to them to get elected (eg Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers") , while trying to entice in younger new left voters.
But the old left tend to be older voters, ie they go out and vote.
So a left wing party has to continue to appeal to them to get elected (eg Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers") , while trying to entice in younger new left voters.
Johnnytheboy said:
I should have added that the old left is in decline, the new left in ascendancy.
But the old left tend to be older voters, ie they go out and vote.
So a left wing party has to continue to appeal to them to get elected (eg Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers") , while trying to entice in younger new left voters.
The one that cares about the working class? The electorate already worked that out hence they're not in powerBut the old left tend to be older voters, ie they go out and vote.
So a left wing party has to continue to appeal to them to get elected (eg Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers") , while trying to entice in younger new left voters.
Because there's no such thing as "the left UK wing" anymore than there is a "UK right wing". You are lumping all sorts of different people into one heap when they are all different and have different ideas on all sorts of things. Do all of the "UK right wing" love the royal family? Are all of the "UK right wing" racists?
Partyvan said:
Firstly I'm not a leftie. I'm centre right.
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
Many from the left don't want to be in power; they want to be virtuously right.My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
In a choice between compromising their offer so it appeals to a wider electorate and sticking to an ideology which repels everyone other than the believers but follows the 'truth', they always choose the latter. And each of those groups has their specific ideology, so to get one group to accept they are 'wrong' and come to accept the other's views is impossible.
Partyvan said:
Firstly I'm not a leftie. I'm centre right.
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
You seem to be suggesting that the greens, the libdems, labour and the snp have similar values. I'm not sure that's quite correct. Each has an agenda, in certain cases they are mutually exclusive. The libdems opted to join the tories for the coalition which all but destroyed the party. If they'd gone with Brown, they'd have had more influence in a manifesto and would not have been asked to go back on one of their election promises.My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
It bewilders me.
Partyvan said:
Firstly I'm not a leftie. I'm centre right.
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
Because several of the parties you've listed are not 'the left' and don't even pretend to be.My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Lib Dems are, surprise surprise, a liberal party both socially and economically. While supposedly they have a true social democratic faction in there somewhere, for well over a decade the party and it's policies have been controlled by the 'orange book' faction which is essentially indistinguishable from the moderate bit of the Conservative Party - perhaps slightly more right wing economically, slightly more progressive socially and more liberal culturally (pro-Europe, less overt nationalism/patriotism). Remember that during the Coalition the Conservatives were outflanked from the right by their Lib Dems colleagues several times.
The SNP are probably the most literally centrist party in the UK, since they sprawl all over the place with a supposed desire for Scottish independence as the only unifying factor. So you see a lot of chippy, populist, vaguely 'lefty' rhetoric, a few socdem policies on health and transport, some classic neoliberal authoritarianism and penchant for shovelling public money to private sector bank accounts...and their economic plan for an independent Scotland was to turn it into a tax haven petrostate - hardly left-wing politics.
The Greens are generally solid left, but again tend towards a social liberalism/economic statism sort of lefty-ness. They also have their own internal camps, with radical ex-Greenham Common Earth Mother organic pagan feminists on one side and literal eco-facists (not a slur, their own term) on the other.
As is all too clear recently, Labour had its own ideological divides which are pretty hard to square with each other and can only be 'resolved' on a temporary basis when one side has dominance over the party and its machinery.
The Labour Party couldn't agree with itself over the past five years. A Corbyn supporter could often find more in common with a Rory Stewart-type One Nation Conservative than with a Jo Swinson-type Lib Dem. The SNP and the Greens disagree on some fundamental policy positions.
Remember that Corbyn tried to 'unite the left' at the tail end of last year to stop the supposed prospect of a no-deal Brexit. Despite the Lib Dems having 'being against Brexit, especially a no-deal one' as basicy their only identifiable policy these days, they refused to work with Labour...which isn't surprising because they're liberals, not even pretend socialists. They disagree fundamentally with everything else Labour under Corbyn stood for.
It's not just PFJ/JPF/PPFJ-type 'splitting'. God knows there's enough of that on the actual left (hence why there's a CPGB, a CPGB-ML and a BCP for communists...) but the parties listed by the OP are not really in any way ideologically linked other than being 'not the Conservatives'.
king nutters.Randy Winkman said:
Johnnytheboy said:
..... let's proceed.
Let me explain that a bit better.
Mirror readers, in short.
Guardian readers in other words.
Derek Smith said:
Partyvan said:
Firstly I'm not a leftie. I'm centre right.
My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
You seem to be suggesting that the greens, the libdems, labour and the snp have similar values. I'm not sure that's quite correct. Each has an agenda, in certain cases they are mutually exclusive. The libdems opted to join the tories for the coalition which all but destroyed the party. If they'd gone with Brown, they'd have had more influence in a manifesto and would not have been asked to go back on one of their election promises.My question is, why is it so hard for the Greens, Lib Dems, Labour and SNP to realise that if they united, they'd be in government? Surely their differences in politics are a drop in the ocean compared to their contempt for the Tories?
The Tories are relatively united, the "broad church" approach some will call it. Why not the same for the left?
It bewilders me.
Perhaps I should rephrase my question.
All the parties I listed seem to hate the Tories as their number one thought in the morning. They also all wish to be in power. This should (in my mind) trump their differences and their egos.
Another way of looking at it, I'm sure each of those parties would rather see a government led by anyone BUT the Tories. So a coalition would seem like the logical solution? Not ideal for anyone, but better than the last decade for sure?
To be honest I'm glad they are nowhere near power. I just wonder why they are so ineffective.
All the parties I listed seem to hate the Tories as their number one thought in the morning. They also all wish to be in power. This should (in my mind) trump their differences and their egos.
Another way of looking at it, I'm sure each of those parties would rather see a government led by anyone BUT the Tories. So a coalition would seem like the logical solution? Not ideal for anyone, but better than the last decade for sure?
To be honest I'm glad they are nowhere near power. I just wonder why they are so ineffective.
Johnnytheboy said:
OP claims to be centre right. By the end of page one he will be called "alt-right" or even a fascist. If we can set aside the inability of some posters to differentiate between the politics of Ted Heath and Adolf Hitler, let's proceed.
"Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy"I can live with that dictionary definition, yes.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff