The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Sarko has lost out on his chance of re-claiming the presidency, that's a damn shame that such a honest, decent man who doesn't in anyway take a position completely based on what will suit him best at a given moment won't be President again.

The run-off is still to come but it seems like Le Republicans have chosen to go for someone who is the French Cousin of George Osbourne.

Be interesting to see how that plays against the Populist Right next year, and whether this guy from the mainstream party will turn it on about how much he hates the EU and Muzzas in order to woo the white working class or whether they will care more about the fact that they will probably lose their jobs or have less money to live on under him.

All very interesting.

[Niall_Quinn]

Sarko has lost out on his chance of re-claiming the presidency, that's a damn shame that such a honest, decent man who doesn't in anyway take a position completely based on what will suit him best at a given moment won't be President again.

The run-off is still to come but it seems like Le Republicans have chosen to go for someone who is the French Cousin of George Osbourne.

Be interesting to see how that plays against the Populist Right next year, and whether this guy from the mainstream party will turn it on about how much he hates the EU and Muzzas in order to woo the white working class or whether they will care more about the fact that they will probably lose their jobs or have less money to live on under him.

All very interesting.

I don't get this automatic assumption that the left is better for employment and job security than the right. If anything it's the other way around, with the left wedded to globalisation and all the horrors that brings in terms of employment security (in the west at least). I think it's fair to argue that the right has an appalling, callous, vicious record of defending the working man. Whilst the left is twice as bad. Yes they can fuck around with their minimum slave wage but what has any leftist anywhere done to curb the flow of jobs to the east, stagnant wages and inflation of the money supply or the debt gusher? Fuck all. They have accelerated it by standing on the pedal and never letting up. People have realised this now. The myth of the left is dying away. When the myth of the right dies too then people might just realise they have been living in a one party state all this time. Now THAT will be interesting.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

I don't get this automatic assumption that the left is better for employment and job security than the right. If anything it's the other way around, with the left wedded to globalisation and all the horrors that brings in terms of employment security (in the west at least). I think it's fair to argue that the right has an appalling, callous, vicious record of defending the working man. Whilst the left is twice as bad. Yes they can fuck around with their minimum slave wage but what has any leftist anywhere done to curb the flow of jobs to the east, stagnant wages and inflation of the money supply or the debt gusher? Fuck all. They have accelerated it by standing on the pedal and never letting up. People have realised this now. The myth of the left is dying away. When the myth of the right dies too then people might just realise they have been living in a one party state all this time. Now THAT will be interesting.

It would be an assumption if that's either what I said (it wasn't) and if we were talking anymore about a left-right dynamic (we aren't).

What I'm saying is a pro austerity Right candidate (who presumably is a globalist) may be in danger of losing votes to a populist anti globalist Right candidate.

The left don't even feature here. And in fact if anything it's shown that the binary left-right simply doesn't exist.

[Niall_Quinn]

It would be an assumption if that's either what I said (it wasn't) and if we were talking anymore about a left-right dynamic (we aren't).

What I'm saying is a pro austerity Right candidate (who presumably is a globalist) may be in danger of losing votes to a populist anti globalist Right candidate.

The left don't even feature here. And in fact if anything it's shown that the binary left-right simply doesn't exist.

That's a bit snippy, considering I didn't complain when you described Sarkosy as an honest, decent man. I was taking the piss out of the idea people might lose their jobs or have less money under ANY of these candidates. That's definitely going to happen regardless of who is elected and the same is true in the UK and US. They ALL favour big government, they all favour privatising profits and socialising costs so they are ALL left wing as far as I'm concerned, in the modern terminology and not the traditional one of course. The "fascist" is just a bit more left than the others (just a tiny bit, mind you).

[Kano]

It would be an assumption if that's either what I said (it wasn't) and if we were talking anymore about a left-right dynamic (we aren't).

What I'm saying is a pro austerity Right candidate (who presumably is a globalist) may be in danger of losing votes to a populist anti globalist Right candidate.

The left don't even feature here. And in fact if anything it's shown that the binary left-right simply doesn't exist.

There is no far left in any coherent political form here or in the US because no-one has had the strength of mind to put together a vision of what comes next. Saying 'down with the corporates' is a starting point, but then what? People buy into an idea of a society, which is how the politicians pull their tricks every election time. The right have come forward with their false hope about returning to 'greatness' built on a reminiscing middle-aged generation. Here, the US and slowly across Europe. It's a complete fallacy and bound to fail like everyone else in this economy but they've captured people's imaginations with it. That's the key to any successful political movement. Occupy WS caught people's attention because it was a mass movement that struck a chord but dissipated because there was nothing to follow. People aren't just interested in seeing shit torn down, that's too scary. They need to an idea of what can replace it, so they don't feel they are sacrificing their own security by jumping ship. Until the far left get that bit sorted, the AR will continue to take the lead.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

That's a bit snippy, considering I didn't complain when you described Sarkosy as an honest, decent man. I was taking the piss out of the idea people might lose their jobs or have less money under ANY of these candidates. That's definitely going to happen regardless of who is elected and the same is true in the UK and US. They ALL favour big government, they all favour privatising profits and socialising costs so they are ALL left wing as far as I'm concerned, in the modern terminology and not the traditional one of course. The "fascist" is just a bit more left than the others (just a tiny bit, mind you).

Sarcasm is not the easiest thing to detect

Again Le Pen isn't more left she's populist, and the people she appeals to are probably right wing on issues like immigration, law and order and more left when it comes to government intervention (using that political measurement)

What I disagreed with you about is the claim that you don't get why people think the left will protect them better than the right in terms of jobs, and I don't think it's a left-right breakdown. Where as I think if a binary ideology exists anymore it's liberal vs authoritarianism. Now I say that because I think the word liberal gets misappropriated to mean left progressivism when actually liberalism in its classical form is the political philosophy you hold most true.

And actually I think that kind of liberalism is being eschewed in favour of nationalism and a more interventionist authoritarian approach, partly because the de regulation and freedom of financial markets has caused a situation where politicians won't overhaul the system because of who paid for their campaigns.

I would guess your solution to that is get rid of the politicians, there is no one to offer the sweetheart deals and the big companies have to take their chances with the rest of them.

But my view is that people aren't voting for self emancipation, instead they want government to care for its own first and foremost, deal with the outsiders and make life better for the indigenous.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

There is no far left in any coherent political form here or in the US because no-one has had the strength of mind to put together a vision of what comes next. Saying 'down with the corporates' is a starting point, but then what? People buy into an idea of a society, which is how the politicians pull their tricks every election time. The right have come forward with their false hope about returning to 'greatness' built on a reminiscing middle-aged generation. Here, the US and slowly across Europe. It's a complete fallacy and bound to fail like everyone else in this economy but they've captured people's imaginations with it. That's the key to any successful political movement. Occupy WS caught people's attention because it was a mass movement that struck a chord but dissipated because there was nothing to follow. People aren't just interested in seeing shit torn down, that's too scary. They need to an idea of what can replace it, so they don't feel they are sacrificing their own security by jumping ship. Until the far left get that bit sorted, the AR will continue to take the lead.

I think Jeremy Corbyn represents the left at its sanctimonious best, putting principle above any consideration of the practical and common sense. The deluded belief that his politics still represents a class that it was never really for to begin with. A sense of hypocrisy impervious to facts, grey areas and which takes a kind of mental gymanistic Double Think in order for people to be unwaveringly supoortive of.

With both the populist left and populist right, there is something seductive and when you trim the hedges of bullshit and false, easy promises there are points made by both sides of the coin that do make sense even if you know the people selling it are the most aggregious con merchants you can think of.

It's like one lot of liars have been rejected, and a whole new set of liars embraced.

[Kano]

I think Jeremy Corbyn represents the left at its sanctimonious best, putting principle above any consideration of the practical and common sense. The deluded belief that his politics still represents a class that it was never really for to begin with. A sense of hypocrisy impervious to facts, grey areas and which takes a kind of mental gymanistic Double Think in order for people to be unwaveringly supoortive of.

With both the populist left and populist right, there is something seductive and when you trim the hedges of bullshit and false, easy promises there are points made by both sides of the coin that do make sense even if you know the people selling it are the most aggregious con merchants you can think of.

It's like one lot of liars have been rejected, and a whole new set of liars embraced.

If Corbyn hadn't of been ravaged from every side then he would probably be putting forward more extreme ideals closer to what he truly believes. He's like a local union leader who has gone in too far but refuses to acknowledge when the jig is up. Still, I'd rather have him in the mainstream eye than any other of those other drones in the party. For all that is worth anyway. But he's been watered down. And crucially, he lacks the ability to sell an alternative to the electorate (again, for all that is worth). He could overcome the appearance and PR bullshit if he could deliver the message. Boris Johnson looks and sounds like a buffoon half the time and all the best PR in the world hasn't been able to cover that up. Yet because he is well spoken and clearly a smart guy, that has been enough for people to accept the other bullshit as he shoved Brexit down their throats. Corbyn just isn't the right guy at the right time. Similar to Sanders, but the Yank is naturally more moderate while Corbyn, at heart, is not. But they are the stepping stones, and centrism will continue to weaken as people scratch around in vain for an answer. First right then left. There are ideas on both sides that make a lot of 'practical' sense but how we arrive at those final conclusions is the problem. Although I believe the extremes are possibly closer to wanting to constrict a genuine alternative but they are all doomed to fail. Capitalism by its very nature will implode at some point and until the economy is solved, then it's all pretty pointless.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

If Corbyn hadn't of been ravaged from every side then he would probably be putting forward more extreme ideals closer to what he truly believes. He's like a local union leader who has gone in too far but refuses to acknowledge when the jig is up. Still, I'd rather have him in the mainstream eye than any other of those other drones in the party. For all that is worth anyway. But he's been watered down. And crucially, he lacks the ability to sell an alternative to the electorate (again, for all that is worth). He could overcome the appearance and PR bullshit if he could deliver the message. Boris Johnson looks and sounds like a buffoon half the time and all the best PR in the world hasn't been able to cover that up. Yet because he is well spoken and clearly a smart guy, that has been enough for people to accept the other bullshit as he shoved Brexit down their throats. Corbyn just isn't the right guy at the right time. Similar to Sanders, but the Yank is naturally more moderate while Corbyn, at heart, is not. But they are the stepping stones, and centrism will continue to weaken as people scratch around in vain for an answer. First right then left. There are ideas on both sides that make a lot of 'practical' sense but how we arrive at those final conclusions is the problem. Although I believe the extremes are possibly closer to wanting to constrict a genuine alternative but they are all doomed to fail. Capitalism by its very nature will implode at some point and until the economy is solved, then it's all pretty pointless.

I'm glad he can't deliver his message because he doesn't have one. Any actual policy he has, has been given to him by people who have then turned round and said he's more interested in "feel good" rallies than proposing anything worthwhile.
Corbyn has been taken in by the fame, he loves the idea of being loved by certain people and it's the figurative priapism of that which keeps him in the job. That and he's a useful idiot for the ugly detestables that actually are the de facto leadership, men like John McDonnell who really is a pus filled polyp.

Corbyn is the nice old guy to most and who gives a fuck if it's true or not and he's attacked on both sides, because to the Daily Mail he really is the ideal popinjay he is the red menace they've always warned us about (in reality he's far too ineffectual to be that). And he's attacked by the more Labour sympathetic media because even though they have no idea what to offer as an alternative they historically are well acquainted with Corbyns friends and know what a perfidious bunch of cock smiths they really are (the populist right might be cunts, but they at least don't fool themselves that they are anything else).
I think Labour is battling away to find a constituency that isn't large enough to give them power anymore, the left arguably only has a chance of winning in countries which are far poorer with far lower immigration (because of course people aren't going to migrate to poor countries like Greece).

There is no real platform for centre left, left wing or far left to run on in large fairly wealthy countries like America, Germany or the UK. And there is no way back for it, in the immediate future. If you wipe away the fallacy that Clinton was part of the left than the battle in these countries is between centre-right and populist right and the populist right are 2-0 up.

In the traditional sense the left is dead and won't be coming back, and I can't pretend that I'm sad about that. I don't think it had the balls or strength of purpose to curb the tendencies of the reactionary right anymore than it did in the 1930s.

[Kano]

I'm glad he can't deliver his message because he doesn't have one. Any actual policy he has, has been given to him by people who have then turned round and said he's more interested in "feel good" rallies than proposing anything worthwhile.
Corbyn has been taken in by the fame, he loves the idea of being loved by certain people and it's the figurative priapism of that which keeps him in the job. That and he's a useful idiot for the ugly detestables that actually are the de facto leadership, men like John McDonnell who really is a pus filled polyp.

Corbyn is the nice old guy to most and who gives a fuck if it's true or not and he's attacked on both sides, because to the Daily Mail he really is the ideal popinjay he is the red menace they've always warned us about (in reality he's far too ineffectual to be that). And he's attacked by the more Labour sympathetic media because even though they have no idea what to offer as an alternative they historically are well acquainted with Corbyns friends and know what a perfidious bunch of cock smiths they really are (the populist right might be cunts, but they at least don't fool themselves that they are anything else).
I think Labour is battling away to find a constituency that isn't large enough to give them power anymore, the left arguably only has a chance of winning in countries which are far poorer with far lower immigration (because of course people aren't going to migrate to poor countries like Greece).

There is no real platform for centre left, left wing or far left to run on in large fairly wealthy countries like America, Germany or the UK. And there is no way back for it, in the immediate future. If you wipe away the fallacy that Clinton was part of the left than the battle in these countries is between centre-right and populist right and the populist right are 2-0 up.

In the traditional sense the left is dead and won't be coming back, and I can't pretend that I'm sad about that. I don't think it had the balls or strength of purpose to curb the tendencies of the reactionary right anymore than it did in the 1930s.

I'm not so sure, these things tend to change rapidly, in relevant terms. It was only 12 years ago that Kilroy Silk was been laughed out of town for joining a ramshackle little party called UKIP. Only 7 years ago that Nick Griffin was being smugly lambasted by the liberal establishment. At the same time that Farage was ringing up a couple of million votes. The Tea Party in America was a long standing joke but ended up creating the pathway for Trump. Hardly anyone saw this swing coming. 2008 changed a hell of a lot, very quickly and financially and philosophically the world is still recovering. It probably never will because financially it is in such a devastating tailspin that there are only a finite number of plasters that can keep it limping along. Politics is opportunism, making the most of being in the right place at the right time by taking full advantage of it. In the traditional sense yes, the left is gone as is the right because they have to be adapted for this time period but there will be a counter action to the various factions on the right because the centre claimed power for half a century and showed how ineffective they truly are.