|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 11, 2022 15:36:51 GMT 1
Hopefully someone on the inside pops a bullet in his skull, he needs taking out. A coup has to be on the cards, but the worrying thing who would be the next leader. are we still on about me, hard to tell ;-) 🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 11, 2022 22:45:55 GMT 1
Hopefully someone on the inside pops a bullet in his skull, he needs taking out. A coup has to be on the cards, but the worrying thing who would be the next leader. I read a report yesterday that blamed the bridge explosion on dissident anti Putin Russians although it wasn’t convincing. If it was a Ukraine inspired operation then I would be interested to know if they feel it was really worth it now? It seems to have pushed Putin into his angriest state and ensured Russia's even harder liners have a greater say.
The sure and steady progress retaking towns and villages back from a bedragled Russian army has now escalated to all out war with Russian missiles heading all over Ukraine - maybe Ukraine intelligence know Putin has a limited number of missiles? Think I read somewhere that they can't get some of the parts/chips to make many more?
First person to be taken out should be the new leader of ground operations in Ukraine - a barstard with experience in Syria. Get rid of him like so many of the other Russian Majors and army top brass. Putin? Has to go, but only when there seems to be a path to someone the world can work with to replace him.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 12, 2022 6:35:07 GMT 1
I read a report yesterday that blamed the bridge explosion on dissident anti Putin Russians although it wasn’t convincing. If it was a Ukraine inspired operation then I would be interested to know if they feel it was really worth it now? It seems to have pushed Putin into his angriest state and ensured Russia's even harder liners have a greater say.
The sure and steady progress retaking towns and villages back from a bedragled Russian army has now escalated to all out war with Russian missiles heading all over Ukraine - maybe Ukraine intelligence know Putin has a limited number of missiles? Think I read somewhere that they can't get some of the parts/chips to make many more?
First person to be taken out should be the new leader of ground operations in Ukraine - a barstard with experience in Syria. Get rid of him like so many of the other Russian Majors and army top brass. Putin? Has to go, but only when there seems to be a path to someone the world can work with to replace him.
Putin is like a cornered rat at the moment. He knows it and the rest of world know it too. Taunting him by blowing up HIS bridge was in hindsight probably not a great idea, but it hurt him and damaged his pride and standing in Russia, so in the longer term it might turn out to be a major coup.
The biggest issue that he is surrounding himself with hard line yes men and pushing out anyone that seems less bullish. It makes you wonder when he does go what type of leader is likely to replace him.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Oct 12, 2022 7:32:32 GMT 1
I agree. Not sure humiliating him is the best idea, even though he is evil.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Oct 12, 2022 8:04:04 GMT 1
I agree. Not sure humiliating him is the best idea, even though he is evil. Long term it's of huge benefit. Intelligence suggests they're struggling to fuel their army, wiping out a portion of that bridge has just made that task 10x harder.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 12, 2022 9:53:47 GMT 1
If it was a Ukraine inspired operation then I would be interested to know if they feel it was really worth it now? It seems to have pushed Putin into his angriest state and ensured Russia's even harder liners have a greater say.
The sure and steady progress retaking towns and villages back from a bedragled Russian army has now escalated to all out war with Russian missiles heading all over Ukraine - maybe Ukraine intelligence know Putin has a limited number of missiles? Think I read somewhere that they can't get some of the parts/chips to make many more?
First person to be taken out should be the new leader of ground operations in Ukraine - a barstard with experience in Syria. Get rid of him like so many of the other Russian Majors and army top brass. Putin? Has to go, but only when there seems to be a path to someone the world can work with to replace him.
Putin is like a cornered rat at the moment. He knows it and the rest of world know it too. Taunting him by blowing up HIS bridge was in hindsight probably not a great idea, but it hurt him and damaged his pride and standing in Russia, so in the longer term it might turn out to be a major coup.
The biggest issue that he is surrounding himself with hard line yes men and pushing out anyone that seems less bullish. It makes you wonder when he does go what type of leader is likely to replace him.
sometimes you have a burn a few bridges to keep the crazies from following you
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 12, 2022 9:54:32 GMT 1
If it was a Ukraine inspired operation then I would be interested to know if they feel it was really worth it now? It seems to have pushed Putin into his angriest state and ensured Russia's even harder liners have a greater say.
The sure and steady progress retaking towns and villages back from a bedragled Russian army has now escalated to all out war with Russian missiles heading all over Ukraine - maybe Ukraine intelligence know Putin has a limited number of missiles? Think I read somewhere that they can't get some of the parts/chips to make many more?
First person to be taken out should be the new leader of ground operations in Ukraine - a barstard with experience in Syria. Get rid of him like so many of the other Russian Majors and army top brass. Putin? Has to go, but only when there seems to be a path to someone the world can work with to replace him.
Putin is like a cornered rat at the moment. He knows it and the rest of world know it too. Taunting him by blowing up HIS bridge was in hindsight probably not a great idea, but it hurt him and damaged his pride and standing in Russia, so in the longer term it might turn out to be a major coup.
The biggest issue that he is surrounding himself with hard line yes men and pushing out anyone that seems less bullish. It makes you wonder when he does go what type of leader is likely to replace him.
"you wonder when he does go what type of leader is likely to replace him". - That could be the only reason there has not been a successful attempt to assasinate him.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 12, 2022 10:04:39 GMT 1
I agree. Not sure humiliating him is the best idea, even though he is evil. Long term it's of huge benefit. Intelligence suggests they're struggling to fuel their army, wiping out a portion of that bridge has just made that task 10x harder. But the attack seemed to be on the road bridge with a lorry exploding. Maybe there's more to it, but the oil tankers on fire on the railway bridge just seems to be a lucky coincidence. It's rail that takes the heavy armaments, so have they raised the posibility of making re arming 10x harder by pure coincidence? That doesn't sound like it was in the plan?
|
|
bruce2k
Shropshire County League
Posts: 52
|
Post by bruce2k on Oct 12, 2022 10:38:23 GMT 1
Glad to see everyones got back on topic!
Who's to say the Ukranian Government were involved at all in this? Seems to be quite a bit of skirmish attacks/sabotage going on. So some rogue gangs could have been behind this? Certainly wouldn't rule it out. Either way I think it was a master mind as not only did it cut off the only land bridge between Russia and Crimea, it cut key supplies getting into Ukraine, it would have been humiliating to Putin, it happened on Putins birthday and shows that Ukraine wont just roll over and allow Russia to bomb them without reply!
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 15, 2022 13:30:36 GMT 1
Brings it all home when you read other threads. If there was co-operation in this world. If the scientists of the world were united, then maybe more developments to curtail the ravages of Cancer. Maybe the world working together to cut pollution and "go green". Maybe less people dieing of starvation. Maybe more people living a happier life. But instead we have to p**s money up the wall on armaments for both sides, destroy things, decimate towns and cities. Some people need to reassess their lives and finally try to do some good in this world before it's too late.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Oct 16, 2022 11:46:59 GMT 1
Brings it all home when you read other threads. If there was co-operation in this world. If the scientists of the world were united, then maybe more developments to curtail the ravages of Cancer. Maybe the world working together to cut pollution and "go green". Maybe less people dieing of starvation. Maybe more people living a happier life. But instead we have to p**s money up the wall on armaments for both sides, destroy things, decimate towns and cities. Some people need to reassess their lives and finally try to do some good in this world before it's too late. if only that could happen we would all live in a much better world.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 16, 2022 11:59:07 GMT 1
Brings it all home when you read other threads. If there was co-operation in this world. If the scientists of the world were united, then maybe more developments to curtail the ravages of Cancer. Maybe the world working together to cut pollution and "go green". Maybe less people dieing of starvation. Maybe more people living a happier life. But instead we have to p**s money up the wall on armaments for both sides, destroy things, decimate towns and cities. Some people need to reassess their lives and finally try to do some good in this world before it's too late. if only that could happen we would all live in a much better world. Why couldn't Putin's ego have been satisfied by being a world leader in good things? They used to be that way, great scientists, first manned space flight, etc. In her previous emloyment, my daughter went on a work paid for trip to Russia - she met very friendly people, visited Moscow and beautiful St Petersberg and was presented with a book of Russian history before her return - what a great country they could be again, I'm sure that's what the general population want. The way to make Russia great is to beat the West at their own game. Is that what the Chinese are doing?
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Oct 16, 2022 12:49:41 GMT 1
if only that could happen we would all live in a much better world. Why couldn't Putin's ego have been satisfied by being a world leader in good things? They used to be that way, great scientists, first manned space flight, etc. In her previous emloyment, my daughter went on a work paid for trip to Russia - she met very friendly people, visited Moscow and beautiful St Petersberg and was presented with a book of Russian history before her return - what a great country they could be again, I'm sure that's what the general population want. The way to make Russia great is to beat the West at their own game. Is that what the Chinese are doing? yes it has all that potential , the problem is not just Putin but the people who support him and Wagner group, Yevgeny Prigozhin is already got his eye on been defence minister. for Russia to have a brighter future they would all need to be removed.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Oct 16, 2022 20:26:57 GMT 1
Why couldn't Putin's ego have been satisfied by being a world leader in good things? They used to be that way, great scientists, first manned space flight, etc. In her previous emloyment, my daughter went on a work paid for trip to Russia - she met very friendly people, visited Moscow and beautiful St Petersberg and was presented with a book of Russian history before her return - what a great country they could be again, I'm sure that's what the general population want. The way to make Russia great is to beat the West at their own game. Is that what the Chinese are doing? yes it has all that potential , the problem is not just Putin but the people who support him and Wagner group, Yevgeny Prigozhin is already got his eye on been defence minister. for Russia to have a brighter future they would all need to be removed. Also the many ordinary people who seem to support undemocratic leaders. Right wing nationalists are gaining support across the world, sadly, from Italy, France, Hungary, and not to mention Trump supporters.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Oct 16, 2022 21:28:15 GMT 1
yes it has all that potential , the problem is not just Putin but the people who support him and Wagner group, Yevgeny Prigozhin is already got his eye on been defence minister. for Russia to have a brighter future they would all need to be removed. Also the many ordinary people who seem to support undemocratic leaders. Right wing nationalists are gaining support across the world, sadly, from Italy, France, Hungary, and not to mention Trump supporters. There must be a reason they're rapidly increasing in popularity? Did the world get dragged too far left?
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 17, 2022 7:01:10 GMT 1
Also the many ordinary people who seem to support undemocratic leaders. Right wing nationalists are gaining support across the world, sadly, from Italy, France, Hungary, and not to mention Trump supporters. There must be a reason they're rapidly increasing in popularity? Did the world get dragged too far left? They are two very good questions.
I don't think there are many countries in the western world that could be called 'too far left'. It also depends on what type of left or right wing you are talking about. Economically or socially?
Economically left-wing (pro-central planning): Cuba, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, North Korea, Brazil, France, Greece, Finland, Denmark, former USSR, and most of Africa.
Economically right-wing (pro-free market): USA, UK, Hong Kong, Switzerland, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, India, Russia, and Israel.
Socially left-wing (pro-social reform): All of northern Europe and France, Canada, Switzerland, Costa Rica, New Zealand.
Socially right-wing (pro-social tradition): All of the Islamic world, India, China, Latin America, Thailand, Russia, Hungary, Israel, Singapore.
From the list above you can see that Russia is economically and socially right wing, China is economically left wing, but socially right wing, whereas Switzerland is economically right wing, but socially left wing. It's a bloody maze owd lad.
As for why they are becoming more popular is down to a myriad of different reasons, but the so called free press is at least in many cases fueling the move to the right. Every time a boat lands on the Kent coast there are reports in the Mail and Express calling it an invasion. Every time there is strike action the same publications are calling out the union leaders as agitators and the striking workers as troublemakers who should just accept the lousy pay rises and cuts to conditions in order for the shareholders to be able to make higher profits and the CEOs to improve their packages.
The G7 countries, the EU, the US and even some of the emerging market countries scaremonger about the left. Venezuela elected a left wing government for example, who promptly control of its own oil and gas reserves and told the US corporations to jog on. With the price of oil and gas they should be raking in $billions every day, but they are being sanctioned and nigh on blockaded by the US, with the full support of neighbouring countries to the extent that they can't actually get the oil and gas out of the earth and on to the open market. Instead of the US and neighbours trying to work with the government there, they are forcing the country into poverty to try to grind down any resistance to US corporate power in the region.
The other problem is that right wing rhetoric plays on things like love of country/flag, fear of the different and the blaming of others for our own problems and promises to fix those problems just as soon as we can get rid of of the 'others'. It worked in 1930s Germany and Italy, it is working in some former Warsaw pact countries like Hungary and to a certain extent Poland today. In many ways religion plays a part too. Poland and Hungary are both predominantly Catholic countries, as is Italy, whereas Hitler used the religion of 'others' to force his way to power.
To some extent I believe that Brexit was brought about by the right wing press vilifying the Eastern Europeans that had come over here to 'steal our jobs', not helped of course by the fact that the pro-EU side had the worst campaign going. That 'othering' by the mainstream (especially print) media and the likes of Farage and Johnson and their promises to make things better led to the vote to leave. We have a right wing government here, of that there is little doubt, but they are not far right, yet, although there are some that would be close to that category. If Labour win the next election we will have a centrist government, with a few left wing MPs and a few slightly right wing MPs. At least in this country we haven't resorted to jailing or 'disappearing' those who are too far to the left. Starmer just removes the whip and makes sure they are put forward for re-selection.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 17, 2022 9:25:36 GMT 1
Mainly due to the tub thunping, flag waving, make xyz great again rhetoric I reckon. Then pick on minorities and pick up votes from the "Homer Simpsons" of this world.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Oct 17, 2022 9:42:38 GMT 1
Mainly due to the tub thunping, flag waving, make xyz great again rhetoric I reckon. Then pick on ninorities and pick up votes from the "Homer Simpsons" of this world. Your comment and views on people who lean towards a more right wing government are the exact reason they do it. "You don't know what you voted for"Actually, yes I did, and I still believe it was the right thing.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 17, 2022 9:53:56 GMT 1
Mainly due to the tub thunping, flag waving, make xyz great again rhetoric I reckon. Then pick on ninorities and pick up votes from the "Homer Simpsons" of this world. Your comment and views on people who lean towards a more right wing government are the exact reason they do it. "You don't know what you voted for"Actually, yes I did, and I still believe it was the right thing. Did I say they didn't know what they voted for? They voted for a proud country, Great Britain, the good old US of A, etc. A "better" country. Laudable aims. It's the politicians that stir it up and find reasons why we are not great - minorities, EU membership, etc.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 17, 2022 10:13:10 GMT 1
Mainly due to the tub thunping, flag waving, make xyz great again rhetoric I reckon. Then pick on ninorities and pick up votes from the "Homer Simpsons" of this world. Your comment and views on people who lean towards a more right wing government are the exact reason they do it. "You don't know what you voted for"Actually, yes I did, and I still believe it was the right thing. Martin why do you think a right wing government is better for you? Also which right wing, economic, social or both?
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Oct 17, 2022 10:26:53 GMT 1
There must be a reason they're rapidly increasing in popularity? Did the world get dragged too far left? They are two very good questions.
I don't think there are many countries in the western world that could be called 'too far left'. It also depends on what type of left or right wing you are talking about. Economically or socially?
Economically left-wing (pro-central planning): Cuba, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, North Korea, Brazil, France, Greece, Finland, Denmark, former USSR, and most of Africa.
Economically right-wing (pro-free market): USA, UK, Hong Kong, Switzerland, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, India, Russia, and Israel.
Socially left-wing (pro-social reform): All of northern Europe and France, Canada, Switzerland, Costa Rica, New Zealand.
Socially right-wing (pro-social tradition): All of the Islamic world, India, China, Latin America, Thailand, Russia, Hungary, Israel, Singapore.
From the list above you can see that Russia is economically and socially right wing, China is economically left wing, but socially right wing, whereas Switzerland is economically right wing, but socially left wing. It's a bloody maze owd lad.
As for why they are becoming more popular is down to a myriad of different reasons, but the so called free press is at least in many cases fueling the move to the right. Every time a boat lands on the Kent coast there are reports in the Mail and Express calling it an invasion. Every time there is strike action the same publications are calling out the union leaders as agitators and the striking workers as troublemakers who should just accept the lousy pay rises and cuts to conditions in order for the shareholders to be able to make higher profits and the CEOs to improve their packages.
The G7 countries, the EU, the US and even some of the emerging market countries scaremonger about the left. Venezuela elected a left wing government for example, who promptly control of its own oil and gas reserves and told the US corporations to jog on. With the price of oil and gas they should be raking in $billions every day, but they are being sanctioned and nigh on blockaded by the US, with the full support of neighbouring countries to the extent that they can't actually get the oil and gas out of the earth and on to the open market. Instead of the US and neighbours trying to work with the government there, they are forcing the country into poverty to try to grind down any resistance to US corporate power in the region.
The other problem is that right wing rhetoric plays on things like love of country/flag, fear of the different and the blaming of others for our own problems and promises to fix those problems just as soon as we can get rid of of the 'others'. It worked in 1930s Germany and Italy, it is working in some former Warsaw pact countries like Hungary and to a certain extent Poland today. In many ways religion plays a part too. Poland and Hungary are both predominantly Catholic countries, as is Italy, whereas Hitler used the religion of 'others' to force his way to power.
To some extent I believe that Brexit was brought about by the right wing press vilifying the Eastern Europeans that had come over here to 'steal our jobs', not helped of course by the fact that the pro-EU side had the worst campaign going. That 'othering' by the mainstream (especially print) media and the likes of Farage and Johnson and their promises to make things better led to the vote to leave. We have a right wing government here, of that there is little doubt, but they are not far right, yet, although there are some that would be close to that category. If Labour win the next election we will have a centrist government, with a few left wing MPs and a few slightly right wing MPs. At least in this country we haven't resorted to jailing or 'disappearing' those who are too far to the left. Starmer just removes the whip and makes sure they are put forward for re-selection.
Well done, Neil - a brave attempt to explain world politics, but somewhat let down by your use of loaded phrases (for example "so-called" free press, and not least with the expressions "left-wing" and "right-wing", the use of which terms implies the extremities of political thought, which I don't really see in power in the Western democracies (although I accept that the recent elections in Italy, along with the Orban government in Hungary, do place question marks over the direction of those countries). As you rightly say, it is a bloody maze, although I would prefer to liken it to the Gordion Knot, almost impossible to disentangle, but you have made an honest and genuine effort....Nice one! Call me a cynic if you will, but I tend to the view that politics is less a question of what policies may be "good" than the achievement and preservation of power, and I suspect that we share the view that authoritarian power, whether from the left, right or religiously absolutist sphere is most certainly NOT a good thing... On balance, I fear a left-leaning authoritarian government more than a right-leaning one, for the simple reason that the "left" has a continuing obsession with a notion of "EqIuality" which requires to be enforced from on high - the exact opposite to your fear, I realise. Thankfully, in our mature liberal democracies, we do get the chance, every so often, to vote, and change direction. The terms "left" and "right" seem to me to losing all relevance, and this has been true for many years: from memory, the economic policies of Nazi Germany were not strikingly different from those of German communism at the time. All that being said, it is the case that I view all these matters from the perspective of a right-of-centre (failed) politician, and it goes without saying that there may be other more or less reasonable judgements to be made; I just prefer, on balance, my right-of-centre viewpoint, and you prefer your left-of-centre one.....
|
|
mcrshrew
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 240
|
Post by mcrshrew on Oct 17, 2022 10:55:42 GMT 1
I would argue that Switzerland is not especially liberal, at least in some areas. I believe women got suffrage very late on (feel free to correct me) and their myriad of referenda placed restrictions on the building of mosques a few years ago
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 17, 2022 11:38:58 GMT 1
They are two very good questions.
I don't think there are many countries in the western world that could be called 'too far left'. It also depends on what type of left or right wing you are talking about. Economically or socially?
Economically left-wing (pro-central planning): Cuba, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, North Korea, Brazil, France, Greece, Finland, Denmark, former USSR, and most of Africa.
Economically right-wing (pro-free market): USA, UK, Hong Kong, Switzerland, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, India, Russia, and Israel.
Socially left-wing (pro-social reform): All of northern Europe and France, Canada, Switzerland, Costa Rica, New Zealand.
Socially right-wing (pro-social tradition): All of the Islamic world, India, China, Latin America, Thailand, Russia, Hungary, Israel, Singapore.
From the list above you can see that Russia is economically and socially right wing, China is economically left wing, but socially right wing, whereas Switzerland is economically right wing, but socially left wing. It's a bloody maze owd lad.
As for why they are becoming more popular is down to a myriad of different reasons, but the so called free press is at least in many cases fueling the move to the right. Every time a boat lands on the Kent coast there are reports in the Mail and Express calling it an invasion. Every time there is strike action the same publications are calling out the union leaders as agitators and the striking workers as troublemakers who should just accept the lousy pay rises and cuts to conditions in order for the shareholders to be able to make higher profits and the CEOs to improve their packages.
The G7 countries, the EU, the US and even some of the emerging market countries scaremonger about the left. Venezuela elected a left wing government for example, who promptly control of its own oil and gas reserves and told the US corporations to jog on. With the price of oil and gas they should be raking in $billions every day, but they are being sanctioned and nigh on blockaded by the US, with the full support of neighbouring countries to the extent that they can't actually get the oil and gas out of the earth and on to the open market. Instead of the US and neighbours trying to work with the government there, they are forcing the country into poverty to try to grind down any resistance to US corporate power in the region.
The other problem is that right wing rhetoric plays on things like love of country/flag, fear of the different and the blaming of others for our own problems and promises to fix those problems just as soon as we can get rid of of the 'others'. It worked in 1930s Germany and Italy, it is working in some former Warsaw pact countries like Hungary and to a certain extent Poland today. In many ways religion plays a part too. Poland and Hungary are both predominantly Catholic countries, as is Italy, whereas Hitler used the religion of 'others' to force his way to power.
To some extent I believe that Brexit was brought about by the right wing press vilifying the Eastern Europeans that had come over here to 'steal our jobs', not helped of course by the fact that the pro-EU side had the worst campaign going. That 'othering' by the mainstream (especially print) media and the likes of Farage and Johnson and their promises to make things better led to the vote to leave. We have a right wing government here, of that there is little doubt, but they are not far right, yet, although there are some that would be close to that category. If Labour win the next election we will have a centrist government, with a few left wing MPs and a few slightly right wing MPs. At least in this country we haven't resorted to jailing or 'disappearing' those who are too far to the left. Starmer just removes the whip and makes sure they are put forward for re-selection.
Well done, Neil - a brave attempt to explain world politics, but somewhat let down by your use of loaded phrases (for example "so-called" free press, and not least with the expressions "left-wing" and "right-wing", the use of which terms implies the extremities of political thought, which I don't really see in power in the Western democracies (although I accept that the recent elections in Italy, along with the Orban government in Hungary, do place question marks over the direction of those countries). As you rightly say, it is a bloody maze, although I would prefer to liken it to the Gordion Knot, almost impossible to disentangle, but you have made an honest and genuine effort....Nice one! Call me a cynic if you will, but I tend to the view that politics is less a question of what policies may be "good" than the achievement and preservation of power, and I suspect that we share the view that authoritarian power, whether from the left, right or religiously absolutist sphere is most certainly NOT a good thing... On balance, I fear a left-leaning authoritarian government more than a right-leaning one, for the simple reason that the "left" has a continuing obsession with a notion of "EqIuality" which requires to be enforced from on high - the exact opposite to your fear, I realise. Thankfully, in our mature liberal democracies, we do get the chance, every so often, to vote, and change direction. The terms "left" and "right" seem to me to losing all relevance, and this has been true for many years: from memory, the economic policies of Nazi Germany were not strikingly different from those of German communism at the time. All that being said, it is the case that I view all these matters from the perspective of a right-of-centre (failed) politician, and it goes without saying that there may be other more or less reasonable judgements to be made; I just prefer, on balance, my right-of-centre viewpoint, and you prefer your left-of-centre one..... The use of left and right wing was in response to the post before the one I quoted. Is the print press in this country truly free when much of it is owned by billionaire press Baron's, many if not all of which are registered as living abroad and yet still make donations to the Tory party? To be honest I am probably fairly central economically, but slightly to the left socially. I don't for example want to dismantle capitalism, but I do want it to be more regulated. I don't see the issues with all people having equal rights, it's not like allowing gay marriage for example undermined my straight marriage.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Oct 17, 2022 12:28:35 GMT 1
Well done, Neil - a brave attempt to explain world politics, but somewhat let down by your use of loaded phrases (for example "so-called" free press, and not least with the expressions "left-wing" and "right-wing", the use of which terms implies the extremities of political thought, which I don't really see in power in the Western democracies (although I accept that the recent elections in Italy, along with the Orban government in Hungary, do place question marks over the direction of those countries). As you rightly say, it is a bloody maze, although I would prefer to liken it to the Gordion Knot, almost impossible to disentangle, but you have made an honest and genuine effort....Nice one! Call me a cynic if you will, but I tend to the view that politics is less a question of what policies may be "good" than the achievement and preservation of power, and I suspect that we share the view that authoritarian power, whether from the left, right or religiously absolutist sphere is most certainly NOT a good thing... On balance, I fear a left-leaning authoritarian government more than a right-leaning one, for the simple reason that the "left" has a continuing obsession with a notion of "EqIuality" which requires to be enforced from on high - the exact opposite to your fear, I realise. Thankfully, in our mature liberal democracies, we do get the chance, every so often, to vote, and change direction. The terms "left" and "right" seem to me to losing all relevance, and this has been true for many years: from memory, the economic policies of Nazi Germany were not strikingly different from those of German communism at the time. All that being said, it is the case that I view all these matters from the perspective of a right-of-centre (failed) politician, and it goes without saying that there may be other more or less reasonable judgements to be made; I just prefer, on balance, my right-of-centre viewpoint, and you prefer your left-of-centre one..... The use of left and right wing was in response to the post before the one I quoted. Is the print press in this country truly free when much of it is owned by billionaire press Baron's, many if not all of which are registered as living abroad and yet still make donations to the Tory party? To be honest I am probably fairly central economically, but slightly to the left socially. I don't for example want to dismantle capitalism, but I do want it to be more regulated. I don't see the issues with all people having equal rights, it's not like allowing gay marriage for example undermined my straight marriage. So far as the press is concerned, of course it isn't "truly" in the sense of "absolutely" free, but that can never be the case in our relatively democratic society: to demand such a thing would require a degree of enforcement beyond the capacity of any Western government. Broadly speaking, am content with the existing checks and balances inherent in our current political settlement which I don't see a Starmer-led government doing a great deal to dismember, notwithstanding the desires of those on the fringes of the Labour Party (Ms Abbott, Mr McDonnell, Mr Burgon, and yes, Mr Corbyn for example); the "absolutist fringe" exists in every crevice, of "left", of "right" or under the anarchic "Rebellion"/"Just stop oil" umbrella whose views and actions are a direct challenge to our way of life: "we, the righteous, will have our way, or else...." I wouldn't deny these people the right to express a view, provided they accept in return that they have a responsibility to society at large (yes , I know that they believe that "saving the planet" trumps all and that there is no point arguing with them) As I said, I am comfortable with our current settlement, and share your wish not to dismantle it. Life itself is a competitive journey, and a system which works WITH that grain is therefore less likely to fail, than one which ignores the whole history of Homo Sapiens.....Equality - Pah
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 17, 2022 14:36:43 GMT 1
The use of left and right wing was in response to the post before the one I quoted. Is the print press in this country truly free when much of it is owned by billionaire press Baron's, many if not all of which are registered as living abroad and yet still make donations to the Tory party? To be honest I am probably fairly central economically, but slightly to the left socially. I don't for example want to dismantle capitalism, but I do want it to be more regulated. I don't see the issues with all people having equal rights, it's not like allowing gay marriage for example undermined my straight marriage. So far as the press is concerned, of course it isn't "truly" in the sense of "absolutely" free, but that can never be the case in our relatively democratic society: to demand such a thing would require a degree of enforcement beyond the capacity of any Western government. Broadly speaking, am content with the existing checks and balances inherent in our current political settlement which I don't see a Starmer-led government doing a great deal to dismember, notwithstanding the desires of those on the fringes of the Labour Party (Ms Abbott, Mr McDonnell, Mr Burgon, and yes, Mr Corbyn for example); the "absolutist fringe" exists in every crevice, of "left", of "right" or under the anarchic "Rebellion"/"Just stop oil" umbrella whose views and actions are a direct challenge to our way of life: "we, the righteous, will have our way, or else...." I wouldn't deny these people the right to express a view, provided they accept in return that they have a responsibility to society at large (yes , I know that they believe that "saving the planet" trumps all and that there is no point arguing with them) As I said, I am comfortable with our current settlement, and share your wish not to dismantle it. Life itself is a competitive journey, and a system which works WITH that grain is therefore less likely to fail, than one which ignores the whole history of Homo Sapiens.....Equality - Pah It's all very well poo pooing equality but it's only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were allowed to vote in this country and less than that for women. I can have sympathy for the cause of those who are protesting against oil, without supporting the means that they are using. Most people agree that fossil fuels are causing harm to the planet and would also agree that we should be weaning ourselves off them, rather than scratting around for more. A dying planet is unlikely to affect me too much, but I would prefer to hand over something tenable to my kids and grandkids. Capitalism is far from perfect and the unfettered version we are currently witnessing is not sustainable. It would be better for everyone if it could be regulated in some way, before greed causes it to collapse in on itself. Communism, like fascism is also a terrible idea, but there are very few truly communist countries in the world today, but fascism, or at least right wing authoritism seems to be on the rise, even in and around the borders of Europe.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Oct 17, 2022 16:21:56 GMT 1
Just come back from volunteering at a Foodbank. Had a Ukrainian lady in collecting for herself, two elderly parents and twin daughters. She told us that they think their house in Donetsk has been obliterated. Utterly appalling.
|
|
|
Post by armchairfan on Oct 17, 2022 19:29:24 GMT 1
So far as the press is concerned, of course it isn't "truly" in the sense of "absolutely" free, but that can never be the case in our relatively democratic society: to demand such a thing would require a degree of enforcement beyond the capacity of any Western government. Broadly speaking, am content with the existing checks and balances inherent in our current political settlement which I don't see a Starmer-led government doing a great deal to dismember, notwithstanding the desires of those on the fringes of the Labour Party (Ms Abbott, Mr McDonnell, Mr Burgon, and yes, Mr Corbyn for example); the "absolutist fringe" exists in every crevice, of "left", of "right" or under the anarchic "Rebellion"/"Just stop oil" umbrella whose views and actions are a direct challenge to our way of life: "we, the righteous, will have our way, or else...." I wouldn't deny these people the right to express a view, provided they accept in return that they have a responsibility to society at large (yes , I know that they believe that "saving the planet" trumps all and that there is no point arguing with them) As I said, I am comfortable with our current settlement, and share your wish not to dismantle it. Life itself is a competitive journey, and a system which works WITH that grain is therefore less likely to fail, than one which ignores the whole history of Homo Sapiens.....Equality - Pah It's all very well poo pooing equality but it's only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were allowed to vote in this country and less than that for women. I can have sympathy for the cause of those who are protesting against oil, without supporting the means that they are using. Most people agree that fossil fuels are causing harm to the planet and would also agree that we should be weaning ourselves off them, rather than scratting around for more. A dying planet is unlikely to affect me too much, but I would prefer to hand over something tenable to my kids and grandkids. Capitalism is far from perfect and the unfettered version we are currently witnessing is not sustainable. It would be better for everyone if it could be regulated in some way, before greed causes it to collapse in on itself. Communism, like fascism is also a terrible idea, but there are very few truly communist countries in the world today, but fascism, or at least right wing authoritism seems to be on the rise, even in and around the borders of Europe. Whilst I am no student of the works of Karl Marx, presumably your comment about greed echoes his thoughts as to what he perceived to be the fundamental contradictions within a capitalist system. In short, a search for the "perfect" system of governance is the epitome of futility, a trait shared by communism, fascism and authitarianism of all varieties - I realised this many years ago: all systems are, to use your words "less than perfect". Similarly, the search for "Equality" is an equally fruitless exercise: equal to what, exactly? Equal with whom, exactly? Life itself, indeed, the whole Universe, functions due to its inherent inequalities - the alternative is entropy, where Nothingness rules.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 18, 2022 6:10:15 GMT 1
It's all very well poo pooing equality but it's only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were allowed to vote in this country and less than that for women. I can have sympathy for the cause of those who are protesting against oil, without supporting the means that they are using. Most people agree that fossil fuels are causing harm to the planet and would also agree that we should be weaning ourselves off them, rather than scratting around for more. A dying planet is unlikely to affect me too much, but I would prefer to hand over something tenable to my kids and grandkids. Capitalism is far from perfect and the unfettered version we are currently witnessing is not sustainable. It would be better for everyone if it could be regulated in some way, before greed causes it to collapse in on itself. Communism, like fascism is also a terrible idea, but there are very few truly communist countries in the world today, but fascism, or at least right wing authoritism seems to be on the rise, even in and around the borders of Europe. Whilst I am no student of the works of Karl Marx, presumably your comment about greed echoes his thoughts as to what he perceived to be the fundamental contradictions within a capitalist system. In short, a search for the "perfect" system of governance is the epitome of futility, a trait shared by communism, fascism and authitarianism of all varieties - I realised this many years ago: all systems are, to use your words "less than perfect". Similarly, the search for "Equality" is an equally fruitless exercise: equal to what, exactly? Equal with whom, exactly? Life itself, indeed, the whole Universe, functions due to its inherent inequalities - the alternative is entropy, where Nothingness rules. You're right, absolute equality is impossible, there will always be weak and strong, rich and poor, good and bad, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for more equality. Like I said it was only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were even allowed to vote, prior to that it was was landowners and the aristocracy and eventually in the 18th century the middle classes were given the chance to choose their government.
Equality has improved over the years, women's rights, black rights, gay rights, they have all been fought for and their have been great strides in this country, but in other parts of the world, even the western world these hard fought for rights are being denied or in some cases rolled back on. Equal rights for some 'others' doesn't mean less rights for everyone else, rights aren't a cake that has to be divided.
I have never read Marx or studied Engels or even seen a copy of Mein Kampf, so to be honest I am looking at this through the eyes of someone who is not very well read on politics, but that doesn't stop me from forming opinions based on humanity and decency.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Oct 18, 2022 7:44:35 GMT 1
Whilst I am no student of the works of Karl Marx, presumably your comment about greed echoes his thoughts as to what he perceived to be the fundamental contradictions within a capitalist system. In short, a search for the "perfect" system of governance is the epitome of futility, a trait shared by communism, fascism and authitarianism of all varieties - I realised this many years ago: all systems are, to use your words "less than perfect". Similarly, the search for "Equality" is an equally fruitless exercise: equal to what, exactly? Equal with whom, exactly? Life itself, indeed, the whole Universe, functions due to its inherent inequalities - the alternative is entropy, where Nothingness rules. You're right, absolute equality is impossible, there will always be weak and strong, rich and poor, good and bad, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for more equality. Like I said it was only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were even allowed to vote, prior to that it was was landowners and the aristocracy and eventually in the 18th century the middle classes were given the chance to choose their government.
Equality has improved over the years, women's rights, black rights, gay rights, they have all been fought for and their have been great strides in this country, but in other parts of the world, even the western world these hard fought for rights are being denied or in some cases rolled back on. Equal rights for some 'others' doesn't mean less rights for everyone else, rights aren't a cake that has to be divided.
I have never read Marx or studied Engels or even seen a copy of Mein Kampf, so to be honest I am looking at this through the eyes of someone who is not very well read on politics, but that doesn't stop me from forming opinions based on humanity and decency.
The 1% in the world are the issue, problem is they've engineered a situation where they've pitted the other 99% against each other. You see someone on a lower wage arguing with someone on a perceived higher wage, neither are the issue, the multimillionaires of the world such as Musk, Besoz, Gates etc who then try and meddle with politics are the issue. You'll never see perfection, but it remains a perfectly valid question why more right leaning governments are rising in popularity. The lazy answer is to blame the media, blame figures like Trump, but what's the real reason?
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 18, 2022 8:46:14 GMT 1
You're right, absolute equality is impossible, there will always be weak and strong, rich and poor, good and bad, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for more equality. Like I said it was only just over 100 years ago that the likes of you and me were even allowed to vote, prior to that it was was landowners and the aristocracy and eventually in the 18th century the middle classes were given the chance to choose their government.
Equality has improved over the years, women's rights, black rights, gay rights, they have all been fought for and their have been great strides in this country, but in other parts of the world, even the western world these hard fought for rights are being denied or in some cases rolled back on. Equal rights for some 'others' doesn't mean less rights for everyone else, rights aren't a cake that has to be divided.
I have never read Marx or studied Engels or even seen a copy of Mein Kampf, so to be honest I am looking at this through the eyes of someone who is not very well read on politics, but that doesn't stop me from forming opinions based on humanity and decency.
The 1% in the world are the issue, problem is they've engineered a situation where they've pitted the other 99% against each other. You see someone on a lower wage arguing with someone on a perceived higher wage, neither are the issue, the multimillionaires of the world such as Musk, Besoz, Gates etc who then try and meddle with politics are the issue. You'll never see perfection, but it remains a perfectly valid question why more right leaning governments are rising in popularity. The lazy answer is to blame the media, blame figures like Trump, but what's the real reason? As I said up thread it is 'othering' that is one of the reasons. Another reason is people jumping in to defend the likes of Bezos and especially Musk. As if they give a monkeys cuss about the fanboys. I get the impression that Musk is positioning himself to have a level of control over who gets into the White House and Congress. He's already sticking his oar in on politics, Ukraine and even Taiwan. Fortunately he can't run himself, but his financial and social media backing could well play an important part in deciding the next election. I don't think it's lazy to blame the media, remember the headline "It's the Sun what won it" from '97, when the Murdoch press got behind Blair and new Labour? It is a stretch to say that the vast majority of the print media backing Brexit didn't affect the vote?
|
|