The right wing doesn't hold the answer, we got where we are today with centre-right politics in the UK, and far right in the US. Going further right won't solve anything, all UKIP offer is someone to blame... Much like what happened in Europe in the 30's.
And if you think concentration camps won't come back - well sadly Greece has already put 4000 "undesirables" in new camps so far this year, and this is Europe in 2013!
The world hasn't learned anything, if it had then the politeriate would not be turning to the far right to solve problems created by the right.
Last time I checked we had a free at point of service national healthcare system, we have a rather large welfare state, we have a central bank with control over a fiat currency, state education etc.... We are a pretty liberal leftist state as much as a right-wing one. Unless you think the amount of debt we've ratcheted up is imaginary. the left like to pretend that state enforced 'compassion' will solve things... it won't... it'll probably just make a bad situation worse. I am of a right-wing persuasion I am probably more compassionate towards life than any of you mother****ers
Anything who just singularly blames 'the right' has probably spent too much time doing GCSE Sociology.
It exploitation of both right AND left wing values that have left us in the state. The same old privatise the profits and socialise the losses.
I happen to think that we aren't in THAT bad a state when you compare to other shitholes around the world.
The privatisation of the profitable sectors of public services is a right wing policy. The left wing approach would keep both the profit making and cost burdens nationalised.
Classic examples are the railways, sold off in the 90's? They now cost the government 4 times to run even when allowing for inflation. (Thatcher)
Selling off the PCT's which distribute funds from central government, so that 40% of the governments funding now goes straight into private pockets - replacing the small PCT's which where not a huge cost burden. (Cameron)
Selling off council houses at discounted prices and then renting houses from the private sector. (Thatcher)
Selling off the Royal Mail the moment it goes into profit. (Cameron)
There are no examples of the left wing doing this, because they created most of the above services and havn't had power since. The remains of our institutions are simply the things left over from Atlee that don't yet look attractive to the private sector.
The problem being that when the government sells off industries they get monopolized and prices soar.
There is not exactly a simple answer to it all.
But all those industries you have mentioned are minuscule in the scale of the entire economy, and although i haven't looked it up, could possibly be done to pay for problems that where much more serious to the economy at the given time.
The Royal Mail? Profit? No, the Royal Mail subsidies the spam industry, which basically cuts down a shit load of trees to send millions of people pointless shit. Without that there would be no profit (which is highly questionable anyway). Sooner that's sold off the better.
My point is that it is as easy to blame right-wing policies as it is left-wing. People just pick and choose depending on their viewpoint. It gets tiresome after a while, don't even know why I am even commenting haha
In the UK the PCT's constituted a substantial part of our GDP. They distribute funds to the worlds second largest employer - our health service. The council houses represented a substantial part of our capital assets, and the resulting rents are the majority of our non-health social care bill.
The problem with privatisation, apart from it being an obviously short-term cash-raising practise, is that the services which were nationalised in the first place were services which were essential to the country's economic activity.
The railways is the funniest / most tragic example. Commuting by rail is now prohibitively expensive for blue-collar workers and the rail network is in receipt of more public money (yes, allowing for inflation) than it was when the public owned it.
Socially and economically critical services should not be given to the private sector to milk for profits. Competition in these sectors does not exist (not that cartels wouldn't form anyway) and they are too important to be left to private individuals.
A pile of bin bags that will be cleared away long before anyone dies of cholera isn't quite the equivalent of the working poor being unable to heat their homes or feed their kids.
At the end of the day Humans are the Government and contrary to popular belief the public and the government are not the same thing.
You can look at it from a far angle and say this is what happened then this happened but unless you can explain the entire complex scienario in which the problem was actually created your still talking out of your you know what.
In answer to Kev's points, I'll keep it short because I can only discuss politics rationally after 6 pints of Tennants and a couple of good tokes.
1. Thanks for noting the error.
2. Farage maybe collecting pay but there are very few in the European dictatotship that are fighting for the right to lose their jobs.
3. Do you not think UK could negotiate it's own deals with all countries around the world?
4. Why Britain is goosed is of course partly, arguably mostly, to do with your statement. But, lets face it we were on the guaranteed road to ruin as soon as the welfare state was initiated.
We are in for a huge hit when the interest rates rise and they will when 'people' actually realise the financial state of the UK and it doesn't become such a perceived safe investment bet internationally. The bad times of the 70's will seem like a boom in comparison.
But, I've said before my contingency is to move to Norway
In answer to Kev's points, I'll keep it short because I can only discuss politics rationally after 6 pints of Tennants and a couple of good tokes.
1. Thanks for noting the error.
2. Farage maybe collecting pay but there are very few in the European dictatotship that are fighting for the right to lose their jobs.
Right wing and left wing? these terms should not exist in modern politics.
3. Do you not think UK could negotiate it's own deals with all countries around the world?
4. Why Britain is goosed is of course partly, arguably mostly, to do with your statement. But, lets face it we were on the guaranteed road to ruin as soon as the welfare state was initiated.
We are in for a huge hit when the interest rates rise and they will when 'people' actually realise the financial state of the UK and it doesn't become such a perceived safe investment bet internationally. The bad times of the 70's will seem like a boom in comparison.
But, I've said before my contingency is to move to Norway
What's the alternative, for the millions of people who rely on state support? Or are you of the opinion that welfare's only use is to keep lazy job-refusers alive?
The strikes in the 70's were not a left versus right battle, it was a clash between working people and their working conditions and wages.
The problem was that in getting a fairer deal Britain started to look less competitive than other countries where workers could still be exploited such as Taiwan, China and India. These countries too are now experiencing growing consumer confidence and a burgeoning middle class - eventually they will go through the same pain and we will start exploiting South America. Next century it'll be Africa's turn.
Some clashes had ideological routes, such as the Ford seamstresses and Trico factories where mysogonistic bosses had our women working skilled jobs for peanuts - these where cultural, and a cause I happen to agree with too.
I don't think anyone is in any doubt that most of the worlds problems are caused by capitalism, the problem with it is that there isn't a better system - or rather, capitalism would be okay if it wasn't run by nihilists of the right wing persuation who are perfectly happy to see others suffer in exchange to gain their wealth.
Compared to the practical application of Communism the Capitalist approach at least gives us shiney iPhones and cars with side impact protection - but if you removed greed from the equation then either system would work just fine.
Conservativism is at it's heart the acceptance that all people are fundamentally greedy, thus embracing the concept of greed whilst not trusting in the greed of others is their chosen ideology. It's why we no longer talk about immigrants or people receiving social benefits, instead we talk about illegal immigrants and welfare scroungers... The adjective being the result of sucessful Murdochian marketing.
Europe is a separate and much more difficult situation. On the one hand it's a great concept, in fact much of the world already regards us as one country and has done for some time. The problem with it is all of the above has been left to run rampant. It's a horrifically corrupt institution which at any one time has 4 lobbyists for every MEP in town (with three quarters of them from the airline industry btw - making sure tax stays off aviation fuel)
Personally I'm in two minds about Europe, but one thing is certain - it is a far less important issue than the attrocities Farage preaches. That lunatic shouldn't be allowed near governmental power.
You complain about left wing thinking - and then choose to move to a left wing strong hold? Admittedly it is one of the nicest, richest, healthiest countries in the world - but that's what you get for embracing a combination of left wing policies and long term strategic thinking rather than the short termism we practice here.
-
Norway has a plentiful amount of this stuff called......... oil. That dirty stuff we pump into the atmosphere satisfying the world's capitalist hunger. and around and around and around we go.
And would I not be correct in saying the centre-right party of Norway has been leading the polls for several months now... so happy the Norwegions are with the left right now
We drilled the same gas fields as Norway, it's divided up 50/50. The difference is that their government took 50% of the profits and opened up a share portfolio, and we spent all of the profits straight away...
I'm not 100% on Norwegian politics, I know there is a Christrian right party kicking around but I understand that since the war they've had left governments more than right, and that they do so at the moment - but an educated and well informed Norwegian would be able to fill you in better than me, unfortunately the nearest we have to one on this forum is TVE
I would state this differently. First, all of the material success enjoyed around the world is 'caused by' capitalism. The only way that humans have advanced technologically is because of capitalism, there is no other way that has provided as much comfort for the highest number of people today. What you see as nihilism is called personal responsibility by conservatives, making educated and logical choices designed to ensure personal comfort for oneself and future generations of the family. Rich people educate their children and provide them the mental faculties to make the same logical decisions that created the family's wealth in the first place. Being poor and uneducated and choosing to create children is a horribly selfish decision that affects so many more people than just one family. When a child is simply a larger welfare paycheck or an excuse not to work, who cares if the child is in school or out at 2AM on a Thursday? Extraneous, unloved children will destroy our society very quickly and efficiently, which must be someone's goal or it wouldn't happen that we give more welfare money to people who make the worst decisions. I don't have any sympathy for intentional suffering; that doesn't make me a nihilist.
Someone who is poor and stupid, but went to the same school, same classes with someone who became rich can't complain a whole lot about their circumstances. I'm not a doctor or an engineer because I didn't get A's in school. I don't expect to live the lifestyle of someone who has achieved more than me in their lifetime. I am quite happy with how my life is going at this point. I know that I cannot afford to support a child, but I can afford condoms and I use them every time. That is a decision I make because the opposite choice is hurtful to everyone in my life, not to mention millions of people who don't deserve to pay for stupidity. At some point there will be more money handed out by the welfare system as reward for poor life choices than working people can afford to give. What happens then?
In my mind, the welfare system greatly rewards poor decisions, (not going to school, having children knowing they will not be fully supported emotionally and financially, refusing to perform the labor expected of someone without a basic education...etc.) The system also greatly punishes responsible people who make good decisions, because they are the only ones who are expected to pay for others' mistakes. Why would I continue to work knowing that there are men my age out there who have fathered 5 children already and yet exists on taxpayer money? What benefit do I get by making it possible for a person like that to continue to have more children? I contest that the welfare system benefits no able-bodied person in the country who could not see greater benefits by working hard and accepting responsibility for their own decisions.
so let me get this straight
you consider yourself too stupid to procreate which is the only point of your existence
however you still think you can offer a valid insight on the most compelx and complicated political social and economic issues of your time?
You guys are missing the point of 'left' and 'right' politics.
You have a ruling elite, the so called 'left' and 'right' are both controlled by your elite.
Country, thats irrelivent.
You, as the masses, are simply expected to spend your time arguing and voting for two sides of the same coin.
Heads I win, tails you lose. Thats a win, win for your 'rulers'.
Why is it, when you actually look beyond the superficial differences, do both parties support the same programmes ? A strange coincidence ?
Yeah, Right !
Who actually controls your country ?, really controls it.
It sure isn't you or me.
Whats 'democracy' ?, really, how much power do the people actually have ?
You get to vote, in many countries even the voting is controlled by your elite. I.E. Its rigged. Even when it isn't, both sides are controlled by the same group. Same result.
Read Animal Farm ?, if not, why not ?
I'd like to think that most people here are bright enough to see this, after all, it's clearly in your face about how much power the people really have, ZIP !
The question should be is how can 99.9% of the people actually control their destiny.
