• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Liberals nasty, Right-wingers nice!

#1
George Orwell once wrote that politics was closely related to social identity. 'One sometimes gets the impression,' he wrote in The Road To Wigan Pier, 'that the mere words socialism and communism draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, nature-cure quack, pacifist and feminist in England'.

Orwell was making an observation. But today a whole body of academic research shows he was correct: your politics influence the manner in which you live your life. And the news is not so good for those on the political Left.

There is plenty of data that shows that Right-wingers are happier, more generous to charities, less likely to commit suicide - and even hug their children more than those on the Left.
Source.

I'm sure that Sven will have an opinion about this! :D
 
#2
Socialism and Communism are generally associated with revolution or at least radical change. I'd imagine they'll tend to attract people ill at ease with things the way they are - people who want to change society since they're unable to change themselves.

The implicit conservatism of right-wing politics has a similar but opposite bias, attracting people who're more than happy with the status quo. Although there are plenty of radical examples of right wingers, you can hardly present the likes of Hitler or Mussolini as kindly and caring.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#3
DozyBint said:
I'm sure that Sven will have an opinion about this! :D
The day that Sven doesn't have an opinion on something the world will implode in a star-burst of incredulity :)
 
#4
smartascarrots said:
Although there are plenty of radical examples of right wingers, you can hardly present the likes of Hitler or Mussolini as kindly and caring.
True, but who says that the National Socialist German Workers Party was a right wing organisation?
 
#5
Communist Russia - Led by Stalin who was a bit of a dictator
Nazi Germany - Led by Hitler who was a bit of a dictator

mmm bit similar, I feel in fact most left/right wing communist/socialist countires seem to have been led by a single dictator, and his mates.

Vote Monster Raving Looney Party
 
#6
Mobat said:
smartascarrots said:
Although there are plenty of radical examples of right wingers, you can hardly present the likes of Hitler or Mussolini as kindly and caring.
True, but who says that the National Socialist German Workers Party was a right wing organisation?
He did. So did his mates. Maybe not the kind of source you want to credit, but still.

Their economic policies were decidedly right wing, regardless of how they marketed their brand.
 
#7
I hope were are not starting down the idiot Yanks road where the right wing refuses to amit that the Nazi Party were right wing because they had the words socialist an workers in their title.

I have come across that argument on several Yank sites and and they are determined to clain that Adolf was a leftie just like Stalin. I ha hoped that people over here would have more brains than to try and completly re-write history based on two words.
 
#8
smartascarrots said:
Mobat said:
smartascarrots said:
Although there are plenty of radical examples of right wingers, you can hardly present the likes of Hitler or Mussolini as kindly and caring.
True, but who says that the National Socialist German Workers Party was a right wing organisation?
He did. So did his mates. Maybe not the kind of source you want to credit, but still.

Their economic policies were decidedly right wing, regardless of how they marketed their brand.
The Nazis said they were anti-communist, however, I always regarded the Nazis and Communists as competitors rather than opponents. I.e. They both wanted the same thing, they just competed to be the ones who had it.

Hitler may not have nationalised much, but he ran a command economy none the less. Also state spending rose to previously unheard of levels.

Also note that he justified his anti-semitism by claiming that Jewish bankers were exploiting German workers.

Most of what I could find about Nazi economics on the web was highly biased, one way or another. However, this link seem honest, if short. http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch16.htm
 
#9
Hitler may not have nationalised much, but he ran a command economy none the less. Also state spending rose to previously unheard of levels.
Kind of hard to avoid these things in a total war quest for world domination :wink:
 
#11
Mobat said:
Hitler may not have nationalised much, but he ran a command economy none the less. Also state spending rose to previously unheard of levels.
Left and right politically doesn't influence economic policies. By that same logic, America in WW2 was a socialist state since the government directed the use of productive capacity. There were also a fair few South American dictatorships that ran command economies, Chile under Pinochet for one.

If you've always thought of Nazism and Communism as two sides of the same political coin, I can feel a Captain Redbeard Rum moment coming on: "Opinion is divided on the matter".
 
#13
hitler was a nasty kunt and claimed to be right wing good enough for me.
stalin claimed to be a commie lots of lefties these claim he was nothing of the sort. have a bit more of a point there was no workers control of anything etc etc but at the time most people we fooled or shot :roll:
labeling Hitler as a lefite generally comes from the sort of person that adolf would go hang on mate thats a little extreme :roll:
Often seen arguing that spams should have the right to own SAM's anti tank weapons, attack helicopters and nukes :roll:
and Reagan was a commie loving liberal :D
 
#14
Surely this guy can't be referring to his own bosses? Stanford University is like a pod-colony for smug, greedy cnuts.
 
#15
Hitler and Mussolini were only right wing if you were a Bolshevik. Surely we can let 70-year-old communist slander die now and look more objectively at it. Hitler may have been anti-Communist, but he was also anticapitalist. This theme is repeated throughout Nazi literature.

Communism and fascism were competing forms of socialism, the one being Marxist and the other corporatist. American progressives in the 1920s and 1930s didn't refer to it as "the Russo-Italian method" for nothing.

Economically, there is almost no light to be found between FDR and Mussolini: both were nationalist, both were corporatist, and both cracked skulls occasionally (although one more than the other).

And in essence, corporatism is government control of the economy with the co-operation of big business to achieve like ends. It is essentially government saying "you do it our way or we nationalise you". A modern-day example of this is the supermarkets and Gordon Brown conspiring to increase the price of alcohol.
 
#16
Stoatman

Corporatism sounds like an extreme form of regulatory state. If that be the case, I'd argue that it's the intent behind regulation rather than the method of regulating that defines left and right wing.

Besides <tongue firmly in cheek> Maggie was very firm about telling national industries what to do, don't think you could describe her as socialist!
 
#17
Are there any Liberals left in the US? Aren't 'pinkos' keeping their heads way down at the bottom of the parapet at the moment?
 
#18
Mobat said:
smartascarrots said:
Although there are plenty of radical examples of right wingers, you can hardly present the likes of Hitler or Mussolini as kindly and caring.
True, but who says that the National Socialist German Workers Party was a right wing organisation?
The Nazis were a "workers" party despised by the upper classes of German society. If you look at the actions of Hitler before the war, the Nazis look more like the Labour Party than the Tories. The Tories are middle ground conservatives. The political spectrum has always been portrayed as a straight line - Left and Right - but I think it is more U shaped. For the average punter, what real differences were there living under Hitler (right) or Stalin (left) ?
 
#19
DozyBint said:
George Orwell once wrote that politics was closely related to social identity. 'One sometimes gets the impression,' he wrote in The Road To Wigan Pier, 'that the mere words socialism and communism draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, nature-cure quack, pacifist and feminist in England'.

Orwell was making an observation. But today a whole body of academic research shows he was correct: your politics influence the manner in which you live your life. And the news is not so good for those on the political Left.

There is plenty of data that shows that Right-wingers are happier, more generous to charities, less likely to commit suicide - and even hug their children more than those on the Left.
Source.

I'm sure that Sven will have an opinion about this! :D
Orwell was just being elitist! How dare he miss out corduroy trouser wearers, beardie-weirdies of various religious and political viewpoints, rich people who feel guilty about their wealth (Tony Benn?) but not guilty enough to actually dish it out to the poor but still use their influence for their family (his 18 year old grand-daughter for MP?), celebrities (whateverthe**** they are!) and other two-faced money grabbing lying barstewards e.g.most ZANULiarbour politicains of whatever ilk. :twisted:

Have I missed anybody?
 
#20
Sven said:
Consider the source, Dozy - is it trustworthy, shown to be honest in the past?



Oh dear, fails on both counts.
So have you read the book that the article was based on or did you just see "Daily Mail" in the title and throw a wobbly? I know exactly which one you did because you can't see past your own nose. Here are some references that took 5 seconds to google. Of course you didn't bother to even do that otherwise you would have seen the summaries and claims made extracted from the book just as the Daily Mail article does and this would have meant that you couldn't spout your usual nonsense or claim the DM as being untrustworthy. You've been busted.

http://www.ereader.com/ereader/eBooks/eBook68802.htm?cache
http://www.hoover.org/pubaffairs/releases/19357979.html
http://www.fictionwise.com/eBooks/eBook68802.htm?cache
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/DrPaulKengor/2008/06/16/makers_and_takers
http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780385513500
http://www.amazon.com/Makers-Takers-Conservatives-Liberals-Complain/dp/B001AL664M

I suspect if the Daily Flail claimed that 1+1 =2 Sven would automatically dismiss it. Funnily enough the claims in the book include these which are apt when describing Sven.

* Liberals are more self-centered than conservatives.
* Liberals are more envious and less hardworking than conservatives.
* Conservatives value truth more than liberals, and are less prone to cheating and lying.
* Conservatives are actually more knowledgeable than liberals.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top