What the same Overton window that is described as shifting over time, open to evolution of society?
I agree they are as far right as any party in the UK, but they are they a Nationalist party?
Yes.
1 Like
Itâs fair to say that it is rather nebulous. There are elements that are common, though. Opposition to universal human rights, belief that âmight is rightâ, intolerance of minorities, exceptionalism, ultra-nationalism and nativism, elitist hierarchy, supremacism.
There is also the horseshoe theory that the far-left and far-right have much in common. I suppose the opposition to universal human rights should really be the red flag.
3 Likes
Theyâve also promoted some pretty extreme conservative views (and policies) with regards to finance, markets etc.
Liking what has happened in Argentina for example.
3 Likes
This was explained to you above.
Just a little tip. They wont listen.
1 Like
I literally said take your figures. Letâs go with 100 more billionaires rather than 180. It doesnât matter. The point is still the same. You wanted to know where the money had gone. Thatâs where the moneyâs gone, and I think you understand that very well.
You are making the mistake of thinking that my support for these policies is out of some kind of twisted revenge against Tories.
I generally think people who are wealthy should pay more tax. If you are sending your children to private school you can certainly afford to pay a bit of tax on it (and the schools can afford to absorb the costs without passing it all on to the parent, but thatâs another argument).
Iâve heard all the sob stories in this. I scrimp and save to send my child to private school. Iâm not rich. I have to work really hard etc etc. Cry me a fucking river. There are millions of parents in this country who could never afford to send their kids to Private School. Some of them can barely afford to feed or clothe their kids. People crying about private schools get the same shrift as poor people have traditionally got when they complain about their lack of money.
It really doesnât. There arenât many poor people own newspapers or can employ armies of lobbyists.
No, it isnât.
Firstly, I didnât say poor people spend more money. I said that they will spend more money that the government directs their way than rich people will - super rich people can already buy everything they want, so additional money is not going to be returned to the economy. If you have unmet needs, like most of us ordinary people have, if you find yourself with a bit more cash youâll meet those needs.
At this level it doesnât really matter what poor people spend their money on. Despite all the tiresome fucking moralising about poor people squandering their money, which is nothing more than an attempt to justify poverty, the main point is that money is returned to the economy.
If poor people are spending their money at Costa and Amazon, thatâs still better than giving it to rich people to offshore. Jobs are sustained, especially on Amazon small businesses and sellers can be sustained etc.
It would be even better these corporations paid their taxes, but thatâs a whole different argument.
Why would I when it hasnât come up until now?
Yes, I have. Iâve met and campaigned with families whose children suffer chronic asthma, and Iâve had the privilege of meeting parents whose children have died from conditions caused by pollution.
Do you want to look those grieving, devastated parents in the eye, and explain why people should be allowed to drive old, polluting vehicles into inner cities where there are perfectly good transport links.
The notional left of politics can listen to people all you like, but what people are angry about and what they see as the problem are two different things. Peopleâs lives havenât collapsed because of immigration. They are being told that by the people most responsible for this mess.
Reform are not listening to people - they are stoking anger, giving people an easy scapegoat and whipping up hatred.
As a moderately disappointed Labour supporter, what I want Starmer to do is create a vision for the country that is optimistic and progressive.
The first problem with this is that, as I repeatedly say, weâre ungovernable. Everyone is cynical, jaded, and contrarian. Nobody will approach anything with an open mind and everyoneâs first instinct is to be a cunt.
The second issue is that we need to confront some hone truths first. We canât build as a nation until we accept what a colossal fuck up Brexit was and hold those who lied to us accountable. Labour are starting to move in this direction. We also have to be honest about the wealth gap and understand as a nation what it means to have so much inequality underpinning the nation.
6 Likes
Accurately describing fascists as fascist does not mean ignoring them. Quite the opposite.
8 Likes
Mascotâs point is a macroeconomic one about the impact to GDP being more positive as people on lower incomes are more likely to spend it than substantially wealthier people, which is correct.
Yours is a totally separate point about how people on low incomes choose to spend that money.
If they are not buying coffee, then it is still going to be spent on something else, and someone who is wealthier is already doing that spending from their current budget. That activity leads to higher GDP/ revenue for the government.
All parties listen to people (I think the governmentâs stance on Brexit and immigration in particular obviously suggest as much). Accusations around others not listening tend to be because they donât like or understand the answer and to justify poor behaviour. My 8-year-old being a prime example.
Strong support for parties with RW views is nothing new. Iâm not that familiar with what is happening elsewhere but traditionally the share of the vote on the right is usually more consolidated than that on the left, which has always been a much broader church, so gets split more easily. Thatâs still what weâre seeing today.
And that explains much of the rise of Reform which has its roots in UKIP, and before that James Goldsmithâs referendum party which itself was drawing from elements of the Conservatives. It is cannibalizing the existing conservative votes while the left leaning share of the vote that helped Labour win the election is being split across more parties than before as that support bleeds off for a variety of reasons - but little of that is going to Reform.
There has been for a number of years much talk about how ageing populations are leading to a blurring of ideologies that rightwing groups have been better at tapping into. Those with left-wing views on economics but a rightwing view on cultural politics and were less likely to have voted for earlier parties with a clearer identity are perfect for populists.
Reform encapsulates that dichotomy perfectly. Itâs roots are in Thatcherism, right wing small government philosophy but its growth in recent years has been through promising people to spend lots of money on them. Just because they have been successful to date in this strategy, it doesnât make it right to emulate because these are promises often made through blatant lying.
This feels like what we have also been seeing in the US, in Germany and other European countries, but like I say, Iâm not that familiar with that.
Thatâs not a particular amazing prediction. Many people rate Reformâs chances quite highly. Partly because of reasons set out above, and partly because people donât necessarily understand events when applying a weighting or reasoning to them. Even I said a year ago there was a strong chance of it happening because the new government was trying to do too much and was exposed to many factors outside of its control.
You often reference RW media - Itâs hard to see how the increased concentration of the media in the hands of people with right wing views cannot lead to greater numbers of people voting for right wing parties.
You also often reference Birmingham and not seeing how 15 years of Conservative government is still driving many of the problems that you are witnessing.
That is not to say that local council leaders are not responsible for their fair share of mistakes and mishandlings, Iâm sure they are, but when the Conservatives formed the 2011 government with the Lib Dems they slashed funding that even now is still in real terms 15% below what it was in 2010. They also pushed whatever costs they could onto those local authorities. Across a period in which adult and social care demand has soared (I think a documentary a year or two ago on Havering Council in London said 66% or more of their budget went on this).
From what Iâve read, around 90-95% of funding from Central government is also dictated by Central Government and so canât be spent on whatever the local authority wants either. Hence the need to find alternative income locally and/or cut costs further.
I believe that Birmingham is already using around ÂŁ80m this year from its emergency funds because its income isnât covering its costs. Hence the standoff with the unions and the binmen.
Given all the negative media about the governmentâs tax and spending, and the potential gap it is facing, Iâm not seeing how it can be expected to step in and resolve the situation.
I and many others correctly predicted much of the fallout from what would happen. You are still pushing the line about people being called stupid and ignorant, or not being listened to (which was often the line used throughout the campaign and afterwards to deflect from having to answer the actual questions of importance or accept responsibility for said outcomes), this despite the fallout having a seriously negative impact on the UK - and in part driving some of the problems you are complaining about.
Beyond that, there isnât much else to learn that we didnât already know before the vote actually happened (iâd been predicting a Leave win months before). Stuart Rose only took the job to lead the Remain campaign because no one else would volunteer. Osbourne and the PM intervened and mishandled it. This on top of having gutted spending on services and blaming all the worldâs ills on the EU. The one main political âleaderâ championing remain was a lifelong critic of the European Union and its predecessor and most likely supported Brexit.
Apologies all for the long reply.
7 Likes
No apologies necessary.
2 Likes
@redfanman it is a long post but I respect you for taking the time to respond to my points. I will give it a thorough read later. 
2 Likes
Come on @mascot you are more intelligent than that.
You asked for a civil discussion, did you not? I am happy to oblige but the best I get from you is a School ground reply.
You do know you are just adding substance to my point of the Left being aloof, sitting on their pedestal throwing shade on people whose views donât fit their own narrative.
No shit Sherlock 
- I am not mocking you here, itâs in reference to the obvious. You will note that in my post I â â, the word promises. This was a tongue in cheek comment.
I donât want a reform Government as much as anyone else on this forum. But this is the way we are heading and why?âŚ.
Sorry to sound like a broken record here, but it is because people are sick and tired of their concerns being ignored, generalised/labelled and suppressed.
Not everyone who has concerns about unvetted immigration is racist or ignorant, yet the Left just throw them all in the same pot.
you know full well the manner in which you said that. If you had read your own link (which you posted in your defence) surely it would be only fair to say, âI remember the figures being this and this but I am sorry, you are right, my badâ. Why remember the figures incorrectly and then post a document that confirms you remembered them incorrectly and that I was right. Do you actually read the links you provide in defence of your point?
Take another look at the link you provided, please tell me the sector where the boom in billionaires increased mostâŚ.then look at the Blair/Brownâs New Labour and its focus on certain sectors and tell me what do you see?
Thank you @RedWhippet please be assured that this post is not aimed at you, you have just responded genuinely and raised some good points.
Additionally, I really do like the word ânebulousâ, I will be honest, itâs a word I have missed or overlooked.
To summarise (please all, donât take it as me being patronising, as I did not know the meaning), Nebulous means;
Cloudy, hazy, vague, ill-defined, etc.
Which I completely agree with. It is open to interpretation and so therefore it is possible to twist your views to suit your narrative.
RedWhippet referenced the opposition to Universal Human Rights as (being) a Red Flag.
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
I have attached a link for peopleâs perusal.
I mean, if the definition of Far Right was hazy, this is even more so. This forum in its own format fails Article 1 & 2.
Article 21 is a funny one.
Article 16 is an âelephant in the roomâ.
In all honesty, if you wanted to, you could find fault with any party or any individual. Which I am sure would contradict another Article.
Just to throw it out there, is Antisemitism not a violation/opposition of Universal Human Rights?
Here is one for you all to ignore and over look.
Aston Villaâs game against Maccabi Tel Aviv has resulted in the banning of away fans, for security measures. Why???
Local Council was informed/consulted on this decision but apparently this was not passed onto Keir Starmer.
So, what Constituency does Villa Park sit in? And who is the MP of that area???
Birmingham Ladywood and none other than the Governments Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood.
I continueâŚ. Labour has inner parliamentary groups, such as âLabour friends of Palestine and the Middle Eastâ and also âLabour Friends of Israelâ. Looking through the groups you will see a number of MPâs who are members of both.
Surprise Surprise, guess who isnât? Our very own Home Secretary, the MP of Birmingham Ladywood and a self proclaimed pro-Palestine supporter Ms Mahmood.
I personally feel she is entitled to express passive views, especially if she has been affected. However, it does call into question whether there is a conflict of interest here. Especially considering Labourâs recent Anti-Semitism problems. I am sure Sir Keir is over the moon with this new headache.
Oh, another member only of the lists is Ms D Abbot. But no shocks there.
I donât know about all that, but the decision seems sensible.
Many people are up in arms about Israelâs treatment of the Palestinians. Itâs not antisemitic. Itâs anti-genocide. The classic British sense of fair play does not like to see a much stronger military crush, and continue to crush, vulnerable people. By the tens of thousands. Ugh.
Tel Aviv fans are not shy in being proudly pro-Israel. Given the climate, there is tons of scope for a fan confrontation, potentially a violent one.
Aston Villa have wisely chosen to curtail the possibility. In my opinion, good for them.
6 Likes
Sorry, I should have been a bit more clearer with my statement. Both main parties are guilty of lobbying.
Newspapers, newspapers, newspapers, yawn. I think the power of the Rags has been diluted. I would be more worried about the unregulated Social Media.
I have brought it up a number of times. I cannot be bothered to go back through my posts. But now that you are aware of it what are your thoughts? Please take into consideration Labours big âdevolutionâ plans.
I am happy to go with your more recent post (quoted above) to avoid getting sidetracked on the original post - so null and void it.
So kind of a counter argument.
I cannot speak for every super rich person and nor can you. You cannot make a statement as factual without evidence, yes or no?
I have one friend whom I consider wealthy, he is one of the most generous people I know. A group of us will go out for drinks and he will suggest a restaurant and then cover the whole bill, pay a tip, etc.
He has 5 children and every Birthday is celebrated as if it is their 21st. He holds New Years Parties and will pay for local bands or comedians to provide entertainment, a personal barman. He asks for no money but that we tip the acts generously.
He pays for his in-laws housing and bills, he pays stupid service charges for his Boats, he buys new bikes for his kids and donates the old ones to charity.
He has his cars valetted every week, if we are going out/out he will hire someone to chauffeur us. But you are right the Rich do not spend money because they have no needsâŚ.
In fact, I would argue the case for a lot of wastage by Rich people because they have money and it can be spent with no repercussions.
Letâs be straight, neither of us know what the rich spend their money on and how much of it comes back to the Governmentâs coffers. If you have any factual information then please share it and we can then scrutinise it. I generally think you work off a lot of assumption.
I will be honest, I can understand the logic applied to the decision but it does not make it right. Infact, it would have been more hostile if it was St. Andrews which is located in the Small Heath area, which is possibly 90% Muslim demographic. I will be honest I fear for the Tel-Aviv fans rather than the locals.
You could argue that the classic British sense of fair play caused this mess in the first place.
I personally feel you are judging a fan base on hearsay and/or their Country of Origin/faith. How would you feel if you were not allowed to attend a game because of prejudice? You are not allowed to follow your team because of something you have no control of?
I think it is embarrassing really. A Country renowned for hosting big Tournaments cannot safely accommodate 1500 fans.
How would I feel?
I would feel embarrassed about the actions of my government. No. Thatâs not enough. I would be outraged. And I would be protesting and doing all that I could to bring about a governmental change in Israel. (Many good Israeliâs are doing just that, but extreme right wing authoritarianism is a very tough nut to crack, hence Netanyahuâs continued grip on power).
Football would be an afterthought, if the leaders of my country were committing genocide.
It would be unconscionable to travel around, from country to country, following my team, as if everything were ok.
Edit
Here in America we are not committing genocide, like Israel, but we are on a very dangerous path under Trump. I will be out tomorrow at the No Kings protest. Hopefully it will be the largest protest this country has ever seen against its political leaders.
3 Likes
Thank you for your honest and passionate post. Although, my view is slightly different perspective - not much. I genuinely loved your post and the way it was delivered
1 Like