[Quantum Boy]

OK I know this thread was closed but the debate was not finished so hopefully this thread can be a better one?

Originally Posted by Slim

What put us on to a path was post war socialism. That's just a fact. Now, if socialism had been in charge of the country for 50 years, then human nature and corruption would have taken over, and it would have failed. However, right wing neoliberalism has been in charge for 50 years, and it has failed. No one thinks this country is in a healthy state at the moment, and yet right wing neoliberalism can't survive on the right alone, it needed the centre, whether that's Blairs (a thatcher acolyte) version of neoliberalism (more centrist, and better, actually - but not good enough), or Camerons/Johnsons, right through to truss' libertarian version.

None of this would have been possible without the centre ground.

Now after 50 years of this, absolutely no change is on offer, only more of the exact same thing, only this time with a different colour rosette. For this to keep happening, then centrists need to have been on board and whether that's knowingly or unwittingly the results are the same.

I'm intrigued by this post because in terms of a summing up of 20th century Western politics in the first paragraph, I completely agree with this assessment. I have no issue with it whatsoever. If I do have to dip into economic ideology -- I am firmly in favour of heavily socialist policies when it comes to education, healthcare and other public services. I more-or-less think that neoliberalism has essentially been the end of the modern world(a slow painful death). With where we are now and where we're headed, I would be all for a form of UBI, if I heard one that actually sounds feasible.

However

I think I can see where we fundamentally disagree. I think what's crucial to the success of political extremes has absolutely nothing to do with actual politically aware nuanced centrism. I think what it relies on is politically un-aware populism. Which is an entirely different thing -- but in fact is exactly what you're talking about when you refer to people whose politics "flip flop". That's not the centre. That's people who don't actually understand politics or economics beyond a very basic level, who are vulnerable to a social contagion and skillful oratory, being indoctrinated back and forth to different ideologies.

It's not the same thing whatsoever and I think somewhere in there is where the disagreement lies.

[arista]

OK let's be civil

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Bauble

OK I know this thread was closed but the debate was not finished so hopefully this thread can be a better one?



I'm intrigued by this post because in terms of a summing up of 20th century Western politics in the first paragraph, I completely agree with this assessment. I have no issue with it whatsoever. If I do have to dip into economic ideology -- I am firmly in favour of heavily socialist policies when it comes to education, healthcare and other public services. I more-or-less think that neoliberalism has essentially been the end of the modern world(a slow painful death). With where we are now and where we're headed, I would be all for a form of UBI, if I heard one that actually sounds feasible.

However

I think I can see where we fundamentally disagree. I think what's crucial to the success of political extremes has absolutely nothing to do with actual politically aware nuanced centrism. I think what it relies on is politically un-aware populism. Which is an entirely different thing -- but in fact is exactly what you're talking about when you refer to people whose politics "flip flop". That's not the centre. That's people who don't actually understand politics or economics beyond a very basic level, who are vulnerable to a social contagion and skillful oratory, being indoctrinated back and forth to different ideologies.

It's not the same thing whatsoever and I think somewhere in there is where the disagreement lies.

Thanks for continuing the discussion and thank you for providing more info about where you stand economically.

How common is politically aware, nuanced centrism?

2 Political candidates

One has a socialist economic platform (for ease, exactly what you've written above), but they also say that trans rights are human rights, and we should take an extra 20k people over the next 2 years because of Gaza and Syria

The second person is purely in favour of the neoliberal status quo, wants to reduce corporate tax down to zero (because job creators), and reduce the tax on Millionaires down to a 15%% flat rate, but they want to ban healthcare for trans people, and will recruit an extra 100k service people to guard our borders, and will ban mosques.

Firstly, who do you think wins that election?

Which group of people will decide that election? Socialists like me, uber capitalists like Arista, or this group in the middle?

Bear in mind we have the the times/telegraph/sun/guardian/times writing headlines everyday about how the socialist eats babies and we have the BBC giving an open invitation to the we hate Muslims party.

For some, I get it completely, they will vote their economic freedom over and above restricting anything they view as subversive, and for some others, i also get it completely, they are centrists of an age who believe trickle down will eventually start working going into it's 6th decade, but centrism isn't generally politically nuanced, it's full of people who say "I don't like them, and I definitely don't like them, so I'm in the centre." It's comforting, and it's easy. You obviously saw the same moral indignation that I saw when i said that centrism is not great. I've been accused of being a lefty because I want to be viewed as being good or doing the right thing, or whatever, but centrism is the actual house where that belief resides

I 100% believe that it's completely obvious who wins that election, and I don't believe it would even be close.

Swan wrote something along the lines of "we want to vote left slim, but you/your side make it hard" Or something like that. No hate to swan, but this is exactly what I'm talking about. When push comes to shove, it generally, but not exclusively, veers right.

When you say you believe in and practice, nuanced centrism, I believe you. You're socially conservative, and have economic views that are way to the left of where 95% of labour voters would feel comfortable. I'm just saying that these beliefs are not normal, as the last 50 years have shown us.

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Thanks for continuing the discussion and thank you for providing more info about where you stand economically.

How common is politically aware, nuanced centrism?

I do agree with pretty much all of the above whole post, my only issue really, is that in answer to this part quoted... obviously it's not common at all, but I don't think it's any less common than politically aware and nuanced stances on the left or right. Call me a cynic but the number of people who can hold a conversation about politics with any real understanding of the issues (or the history) is ... a small percentage, no matter where you grab them on the spectrum. And that's even thinking about the people who are politically empassioned - will show up at events, will stand in the streets, will shout, genuinely believe in their politics - most still can't fully explain those politics, beyond that they sound morally correct to them (at best), or that the people they align with are espousing those politics (at worst, and worryingly, these days as standard). Maybe typically centrist but I do think it's a universal issue. Grab a 20 year old "woke lefty" at an event, grab a beer bellied red-hat-wearing free-market MAGA bloke at another on the same day, isolate them and try to have a chat about Locke or Marx, 9.5 times out of 10 you're not going to get a conversation at all. Blank stares all round.

So I still stand by that I don't think the center influences election outcomes... political unawareness / "mob rule" decides it and it's not always about swaying the center ground over the line. People voicing politically extreme views - that are borrowed - will swing wildly from positions way left and right of center, based on the way the wind is blowing that year, and which campaign has taken off. Elections simply aren't won by politics or policy any more, it's ALL oratory and showmanship that tilts the scales.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Bauble

I do agree with pretty much all of the above whole post, my only issue really, is that in answer to this part quoted... obviously it's not common at all, but I don't think it's any less common than politically aware and nuanced stances on the left or right. Call me a cynic but the number of people who can hold a conversation about politics with any real understanding of the issues (or the history) is ... a small percentage, no matter where you grab them on the spectrum. And that's even thinking about the people who are politically empassioned - will show up at events, will stand in the streets, will shout, genuinely believe in their politics - most still can't fully explain those politics, beyond that they sound morally correct to them (at best), or that the people they align with are espousing those politics (at worst, and worryingly, these days as standard). Maybe typically centrist but I do think it's a universal issue. Grab a 20 year old "woke lefty" at an event, grab a beer bellied red-hat-wearing free-market MAGA bloke at another on the same day, isolate them and try to have a chat about Locke or Marx, 9.5 times out of 10 you're not going to get a conversation at all. Blank stares all round.

So I still stand by that I don't think the center influences election outcomes... political unawareness / "mob rule" decides it and it's not always about swaying the center ground over the line. People voicing politically extreme views - that are borrowed - will swing wildly from positions way left and right of center, based on the way the wind is blowing that year, and which campaign has taken off. Elections simply aren't won by politics or policy any more, it's ALL oratory and showmanship that tilts the scales.

Again, some legitimate and extremely fair points. This is the area I feel this misses, and why i think it matters.

People over on the left and right, even if they wouldn't be able to get down into the weeds, and have that all encompassing discussion/debate around their ideologies, still subscribe (at least to some degree) in a few central tenets that they love. maybe that's even more dangerous than being political blank canvases - I honestly don't know.

On the left, economic (there is no freedom without economic freedom), or social issues.

For the right, anti-immigration or social issues.

Obviously and purposefully, both of those examples don't paint anywhere near the complete picture, but are just a couple of quick golden calves I can place into the tenets boxes.

Centrism is a whole different animal because it is primarily (imo) about what it isn't rather than what it is. Maybe that's perceived as a strength by centrists, where not being right or left is the true measure of intellectual honesty. I've already conceded that your centrism is nuanced, so when I make purposeful generalisations, I'm not making them about what you believe.

We have a 50 year sample size of voters not swinging wildly between left, right, and centre. It is a sample size that has almost exclusively protected the right. When I made the statement about centrism being for right wingers who don't want to say they are right wingers, then that's exactly what I'm talking about.

Blair, to get elected, attacked the left.

Starmer, to get elected, attacked and expelled the left. There is next to no change. He did it because being anti-left wing is ideological for him (and this centrist lab party), just like reeves, streeting, and the whole cabal of tory cosplayers. At least Blair found a place for people like prescott. There is no prescott in the current lab party, and if there was, the whip would be removed within minutes.

Lab/Tory/Reform polling at over 60% between them. All saying the exact same things on immigration and other social issues, all 100% behind not taxing wealth.

The perceived centre has been shifted way over to the right, and that hasn't pushed centrists to the left (to remain in the centre ground), it's kept them on the right.

[The Slim Reaper]

Well then...

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Well then...

While the thread was a fascinating re-read I don't see that anything has changed, honestly. The problem is populism, ignorance and convincing oratory and all of the rest is smoke and mirrors. If anything that seems more obvious than ever. The current oratory is barely even rooted in reality. Global politics as it currently stands (on all fronts) is pretty much a collection of bed time stories for thick people. Maybe my centrism has descended into full blown political nihilism.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

While the thread was a fascinating re-read I don't see that anything has changed, honestly. The problem is populism, ignorance and convincing oratory and all of the rest is smoke and mirrors. If anything that seems more obvious than ever. The current oratory is barely even rooted in reality. Global politics as it currently stands (on all fronts) is pretty much a collection of bed time stories for thick people. Maybe my centrism has descended into full blown political nihilism.

Nothing has changed? How is the centrist lab party doing these days? A mix of left/right policies or full on radical right wing?

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Nothing has changed? How is the centrist lab party doing these days? A mix of left/right policies or full on radical right wing?

No, nothing has changed in the slightest, and this being sadly correct if anything is exactly what I was talking about;

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

I think what's crucial to the success of political extremes has absolutely nothing to do with actual politically aware nuanced centrism. I think what it relies on is politically un-aware populism. Which is an entirely different thing -- but in fact is exactly what you're talking about when you refer to people whose politics "flip flop". That's not the centre. That's people who don't actually understand politics or economics beyond a very basic level, who are vulnerable to a social contagion and skillful oratory, being indoctrinated back and forth to different ideologies.

British (and of course American, and mostly western in general) politics in summary, it's not real political ideology it's psychological manipulation in pursuit of control. Labour flipping from support of immigration to full on Reform-clones over night, and why? Because they think it might work well for them politically. Literally no other reason.

[Quantum Boy]

Giving it thought it actually looks like they're making moves out of sheer desperation; they believe that Reform is on a path to power and I think they're probably correct. However I don't think their desperate swivelling will work. I think we're cooked.

[MTVN]

Remember Labour released a mug during the 2015 election campaign with 'controls on immigration' on it. It was one of their big pledges that they wrote in stone. So it's not really a new thing for Labour to talk tough on immigration.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Remember Labour released a mug during the 2015 election campaign with 'controls on immigration' on it. It was one of their big pledges that they wrote in stone. So it's not really a new thing for Labour to talk tough on immigration.

They just agree a new tariff with India meaning new workers don’t pay income tax for three years

Am I missing something or is this just give with one hand and take back with the other

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Well then...

Welcome back Slim.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

Giving it thought it actually looks like they're making moves out of sheer desperation; they believe that Reform is on a path to power and I think they're probably correct. However I don't think their desperate swivelling will work. I think we're cooked.

I 100% agree with you.

Labour will not win back anyone that have gone to Reform any time soon.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

Giving it thought it actually looks like they're making moves out of sheer desperation; they believe that Reform is on a path to power and I think they're probably correct. However I don't think their desperate swivelling will work. I think we're cooked.

Labour have lost all trust, every caller to LBC yesterday was completely blindsided by them going for legal migration especially care workers, we shouldn't be surprised if they can take a fuel allowance away with no notice just before winter and then say dont worry you will get a pension top up next April * they can literally do anything without batting an eyelid.

* if you survive the winter

[Liam-]

Starmer is trying to appeal to people that will never vote for him because they think he’s a race traitor and he’s alienating every other voting base, because rabid centrism will always be the gateway to facism

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Starmer is trying to appeal to people that will never vote for him because they think he’s a race traitor and he’s alienating every other voting base, because rabid centrism will always be the gateway to facism

Good to see you finally have some red line

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Labour have lost all trust, every caller to LBC yesterday was completely blindsided by them going for legal migration especially care workers, we shouldn't be surprised if they can take a fuel allowance away with no notice just before winter and then say dont worry you will get a pension top up next April * they can literally do anything without batting an eyelid.

* if you survive the winter

I think they've been banking on having time to do what they want now and still shift gear for votes well in advance of the next election; but I think they underestimated how quickly the shift to Reform was happening. Reform (Farage) has clocked onto the "Trump-like" ability to completely hoodwink the population into believing #1 that they're under existential threat and #2 that he's here to help the average citizen (whilst in fact pursuing isolationism and continuing to siphon wealth upwards). There is NO ONE to vote for because politics (as I said above) in the modern era is firmly rooted in populism and propaganda and ZERO ideology. The populism and propaganda always existed but they were largely ideological tools... now they're the bread and butter. That's all there is. The competition, vote share. Yeah I think I'm definitely well into the realms of political nihilism now... I don't think democracy works in the information era, at all, the entire system.

Humans being what we are (tribalistic) my opinion is still firmly that a zero-competition system does not work, but also that the wealth-platform has to be supported on pillars of socialism and not overloaded by ultra-wealth on the top. Trickle-down DOES NOT work, wealth redistribution is an essential part of modern capitalism, but the free market zealots will call you a communist while the left lambast you as well. That's the reality of "centrism". Meh. It's not even centrism as a political ideology, it's just intellectual honesty and being unable to borg-mind into a predetermined political camp.

[arista]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Remember Labour released a mug during the 2015 election campaign with 'controls on immigration' on it. It was one of their big pledges that they wrote in stone. So it's not really a new thing for Labour to talk tough on immigration.

That would sell well, now


Ed Miliband was getting advice from
His many advisers





Reform UK should do some

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

No, nothing has changed in the slightest, and this being sadly correct if anything is exactly what I was talking about;



British (and of course American, and mostly western in general) politics in summary, it's not real political ideology it's psychological manipulation in pursuit of control. Labour flipping from support of immigration to full on Reform-clones over night, and why? Because they think it might work well for them politically. Literally no other reason.

Labour had a massive majority post election, and instead of using that majority to implement policies that the country was/is desperate for, they ran straight to the right. That is exactly what I've said about centrism from the off - political blank pages who only exist to pave the way for right wing politics. I also pointed out, that centrism is generally (but not completely) for folks who don't want to admit they are right wing themselves.

Everything I said is playing out right in front of our eyes, and even the reasoning (the bit in bold) you give, is the perfect encapsulation of my description of centrism.

For 5 years we've heard about the adults being back in charge, and how this is an end to student politics (because the politics that built this country post war can now be dismissed in such ridiculous fashion). Starmer, the lawyer, surgically cutting through the tory lies. It was blatantly obvious that the emperor was stark bollock naked.

We were told he was only acting a bit right wing to win power, and once the election was over he would moderate and move back to the left. Again, absolutely nothing about him or his cabinet is remotely left wing. Reeves was criticising the tories in 2014 for not going far enough with austerity, and yet the left was lectured constantly.

This is everything a centrist could have wanted - a centrist party with a massive majority, and well, here we are.

So it's not centrism, it's psychological manipulation, well that's the same psychological manipulation the left have been talking about for decades, and again, when push comes to shove - centrism goes right, not just occasionally, but pretty much exclusively.

2 Political candidates

One has a socialist economic platform (for ease, exactly what you've written above), but they also say that trans rights are human rights, and we should take an extra 20k people over the next 2 years because of Gaza and Syria

The second person is purely in favour of the neoliberal status quo, wants to reduce corporate tax down to zero (because job creators), and reduce the tax on Millionaires down to a 15%% flat rate, but they want to ban healthcare for trans people, and will recruit an extra 100k service people to guard our borders, and will ban mosques.

Firstly, who do you think wins that election?

Centrism votes the 2nd candidate, and that's just a fact we are witnessing in real time.

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Labour had a massive majority post election, and instead of using that majority to implement policies that the country was/is desperate for, they ran straight to the right. That is exactly what I've said about centrism from the off - political blank pages who only exist to pave the way for right wing politics. I also pointed out, that centrism is generally (but not completely) for folks who don't want to admit they are right wing themselves.

Everything I said is playing out right in front of our eyes, and even the reasoning (the bit in bold) you give, is the perfect encapsulation of my description of centrism.

For 5 years we've heard about the adults being back in charge, and how this is an end to student politics (because the politics that built this country post war can now be dismissed in such ridiculous fashion). Starmer, the lawyer, surgically cutting through the tory lies. It was blatantly obvious that the emperor was stark bollock naked.

We were told he was only acting a bit right wing to win power, and once the election was over he would moderate and move back to the left. Again, absolutely nothing about him or his cabinet is remotely left wing. Reeves was criticising the tories in 2014 for not going far enough with austerity, and yet the left was lectured constantly.

This is everything a centrist could have wanted - a centrist party with a massive majority, and well, here we are.

So it's not centrism, it's psychological manipulation, well that's the same psychological manipulation the left have been talking about for decades, and again, when push comes to shove - centrism goes right, not just occasionally, but pretty much exclusively.



Centrism votes the 2nd candidate, and that's just a fact we are witnessing in real time.

I maintain that we've never disagreed on any of this and what passes as the actual political centre is very different to individual supposed-centre vs. political nuance; you conflate the "center-ism" of supposedly trying to walk a tightrope on every issue vs simply not being swept into partisan politics on an individual level. You might be right about "most claiming the center" to be shy-righties but that's really no different to the rest of the political ignorance (blind right and blind left) - most people just don't HAVE their own informed or well rounded opinion, it's all different shades of the same thing, like I said democracy in the age of fast (dis)information and instant communication is fundamentally broken.

Where we've had a sticking point in the past is in when I point out the danger of blinkered left-wing stonewalling and ideologically driven anti-intellectualism and that it has been a key catalyst in sending a large chunk of "Well I Don't Really Know Much About That"s over to the right, or rather, into the arms of the propagandists claiming they're going to sort it all out.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter, I don't think you've tended to agree and seem to believe that if "centrists" had just hushed up and stopped pointing out the glaring inconsistencies (and frequent gaslighting) present in left-leaning rhetoric then somehow we wouldn't be here and the right wouldn't be rising... whereas (to put it briefly) I actually think left-wing propaganda has been used, deliberately, to galvanise the right and to great effect. And here we are. The trigger's been pulled.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

I maintain that we've never disagreed on any of this and what passes as the actual political centre is very different to individual supposed-centre vs. political nuance; you conflate the "center-ism" of supposedly trying to walk a tightrope on every issue vs simply not being swept into partisan politics on an individual level. You might be right about "most claiming the center" to be shy-righties but that's really no different to the rest of the political ignorance (blind right and blind left) - most people just don't HAVE their own informed or well rounded opinion, it's all different shades of the same thing, like I said democracy in the age of fast (dis)information and instant communication is fundamentally broken.

Where we've had a sticking point in the past is in when I point out the danger of blinkered left-wing stonewalling and ideologically driven anti-intellectualism and that it has been a key catalyst in sending a large chunk of "Well I Don't Really Know Much About That"s over to the right, or rather, into the arms of the propagandists claiming they're going to sort it all out.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter, I don't think you've tended to agree and seem to believe that if "centrists" had just hushed up and stopped pointing out the glaring inconsistencies (and frequent gaslighting) present in left-leaning rhetoric then somehow we wouldn't be here and the right wouldn't be rising... whereas (to put it briefly) I actually think left-wing propaganda has been used, deliberately, to galvanise the right and to great effect. And here we are. The trigger's been pulled.

I also acknowledge we have a lot of areas of agreement, I've never said otherwise. Just a discussion around what I said would happen, currently playing out right in front of our eyes.

You're talking as though the left had the power and were/are making demands of centrists - which has absolutely never been the case. All the left did/does is point out how dangerous centrism is, in service to the protection/palatability of the far right. Useful idiots, if you like.

Look at the state of everything, and even through all of it, your disdain for "the left" seeps through. Pretty crazy to me, that after everything that's happened over the last few months of this government, the left still lines up for blame It's wild, dude.

The accusation you've made is a confession imo. Centrism is celebrated as intellectual honesty in this country. Only one political ideology is described as "student politics". The cold war did a lot to destroy any potential good this country is capable of.

Every far right movement is always accompanied by accusations against the dangerous left, but it's the centrists currently hooking up with the far right, not the left, so blame the left for creeping fascism all you like, you'd be in some pretty exalted company with folks like Hitler and Mussolini. I'm not saying you're hitler, and I know how far your morals and political ideology is away from those folks, but when the right creeps, the left gets blamed has been played out may times before, because it's easier to blame than self reflect (for all of us, me included).

It's the laziest reasoning imaginable in my opinion - they made me adopt the language of the unhinged right, guv'nor. They/he/she made me do it, didn't work in school, so it doesn't get to be an explanation for everything that is currently wrong.

[Beso]

Its the silent majority that counts.

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I also acknowledge we have a lot of areas of agreement, I've never said otherwise. Just a discussion around what I said would happen, currently playing out right in front of our eyes.

I don't think the current outcomes have been in question at any point in recent memory though? - not since at the very least 2016, the direction of travel has been painfully apparent. The UK's flip to Labour was an illusion of hope but it was a mirage; it was a rejection of the Tories, fairly evident even in the discourse at the time, and now there's a viable option 3 for people to reject both. How quickly and blatantly Labour turned heel was surprising to be fair - I don't think anyone saw that coming, even those who remember pre-2008 Labour (when all the signs were there).

You're talking as though the left had the power and were/are making demands of centrists - which has absolutely never been the case. All the left did/does is point out how dangerous centrism is, in service to the protection/palatability of the far right. Useful idiots, if you like.

The social left (or hard-progressivism if you like, it really has very little to do with the economic left in ideology) has engaged in vast amounts of anti-intellectualism and you, surely, must know that but this is what I mean - there's a culture of denial around it... I don't know how you can with a straight face claim that there are idiots on the right, useful idiots in the center, but no useful idiots over on the left. THAT is bizarre and, if you're honest, entirely unrealistic. Problems there, problems there, but none over here? It's just straight up implausible.

I get that the left have pointed out the dangers of centrism and it's usefulness to the right and I don't disagree - I just also hold the opinion that "loud and dumb" movements on the left are ALSO extremely useful to the far right... and I find denial of that to be intellectually dishonest. I think the motivation is foot-planting and a worry about ceding ground; that any criticism of the left is right-or-centre, but it's unworkable, and refusing to acknowledge the flaws where they exist is tribalism in a nutshell. You can't engage with a brick wall, it's a waste of time, so in the end people stop trying.

Look at the state of everything, and even through all of it, your disdain for "the left" seeps through. Pretty crazy to me, that after everything that's happened over the last few months of this government, the left still lines up for blame It's wild, dude.

It's not disdain nor "blame" it's just my opinion about the mechanisms that have clearly played out over the last decade. Various political forces have deliberately stoked tribalism and backlash to achieve their political goals, and it has been EXTREMELY effective. The right-wing pipeline highlights and weaponising left-wing movements and paints them as unreasonable, and there are aspects of how those movements work that make it very easy for them to do that. That's just what I see as objective truth.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Quantum Boy

I don't think the current outcomes have been in question at any point in recent memory though? - not since at the very least 2016, the direction of travel has been painfully apparent. The UK's flip to Labour was an illusion of hope but it was a mirage; it was a rejection of the Tories, fairly evident even in the discourse at the time, and now there's a viable option 3 for people to reject both. How quickly and blatantly Labour turned heel was surprising to be fair - I don't think anyone saw that coming, even those who remember pre-2008 Labour (when all the signs were there).



The social left (or hard-progressivism if you like, it really has very little to do with the economic left in ideology) has engaged in vast amounts of anti-intellectualism and you, surely, must know that but this is what I mean - there's a culture of denial around it... I don't know how you can with a straight face claim that there are idiots on the right, useful idiots in the center, but no useful idiots over on the left. THAT is bizarre and, if you're honest, entirely unrealistic. Problems there, problems there, but none over here? It's just straight up implausible.

I get that the left have pointed out the dangers of centrism and it's usefulness to the right and I don't disagree - I just also hold the opinion that "loud and dumb" movements on the left are ALSO extremely useful to the far right... and I find denial of that to be intellectually dishonest. I think the motivation is foot-planting and a worry about ceding ground; that any criticism of the left is right-or-centre, but it's unworkable, and refusing to acknowledge the flaws where they exist is tribalism in a nutshell. You can't engage with a brick wall, it's a waste of time, so in the end people stop trying.



It's not disdain nor "blame" it's just my opinion about the mechanisms that have clearly played out over the last decade. Various political forces have deliberately stoked tribalism and backlash to achieve their political goals, and it has been EXTREMELY effective. The right-wing pipeline highlights and weaponising left-wing movements and paints them as unreasonable, and there are aspects of how those movements work that make it very easy for them to do that. That's just what I see as objective truth.

I've never said that the left doesn't have idiots. I just don't think that left wing idiots are in any way responsible for people turning full fash, even the suggestion of that is absolutely ludicrous, as it removes all agency.

The social and economic left are not that far apart. Leftism was built on a justice movement. You can have your opinions on how well that has worked out; trust me, I have my own opinions on how/why of the failings, but justice is justice be it social or economic. My motives are geared way more towards the economic side, because I believe if people have financial freedom, then most of the other justice takes care of itself.

Bigotry against vulnerable people is because the game is rigged to set poor/working class people up against other working class/poor people. Remove that anxiety, and tolerance/acceptance would change. Just as it did in the 90's when there was a financial boom. Admittedly is was a bubble destined to crash, but upwards mobility definitely curbed some of the base crassness we see today.

I presume most of your anti-intellectual jibes are geared towards the trans debate - apologies if that's incorrect. I mean, the trans debate has radicalised centrist mums/dads into hard right politics. it was a movement set up to play on the fears and natural anxieties of one vulnerable group (women) to pit them against another vulnerable group (trans people). Trans people have existed through history (proving it is a real thing and not a fad) combined with the fact we see actual biological changes from male to female in nature dependant on resources.

The leaders of the anti-trans movement are close to far right groups (and I know you also agree on this point), it was pushed by billionaires and the right to set up the latest wedge issue, which is the only thing the right has to guide it's politics.

We have so many examples of this taking place over the last century.

Coloureds - protect women
Gays - protect your sons from being recruited
Immigrants - protect our women (historically) now it's more about resources
trans people - protect women

All wedge issues used by extreme right wing politics over the last 70 years. The same group who want to protect women against trans people,are the leaders of the trad wife back in the kitchen/serve your husbands movement.

Trans acceptance will happen eventually and a lot of people will have to pretend that they were never rabid terfs and serfs, to their future grandchildren.

Where the left did screw up imo, was in areas around sports and young persons healthcare, including the failure to combat a lot of the false accusations/lies around such issues, which did allow space for the right/centre to take advantage, but again, it wasn't because I saw a Hitler documentary that forced me to the economic left. I had my own agency, and I make my own choices.

And still it's liberalism that aligns itself with the hard right, and never aligns with even the centre left, all since Thatcherism.