What's the difference between a Leftie and a Liberal?

thank you. But I think I imbibed too much wine, it was the wine talking. I'll have to make sure that I continue consuming at that rate.

I think that Claig is seriously clever! I've learnt more from this thread than any other.

Fuck no!

daftpunk is not a chap either. You are certainly getting mixed up. Can't you make a case without resorting to swearing?

oh no sorry claig i'm getting you mixed up with daftpunk - although you're both cunts ;)

sorry theCentralcommitte I'm not a chap. I'm not sure where uyou have been before.

anyway claig, you're a chap, right? haven't we been here before?

"poisonous socialism wrapped in an extra dose of piety"

reminds me of Blairism

oh gawd claig & longfingernails in full effeck

Step away from the thread ladies, step away from the thread

I wouldn't say that Nick Clegg is on the margins of British politics these days. You may be right when talking about Lib Dem voters - but amongst the party the Orange Bookers are at least a very significant minority - they might even outnumber the SDP-types.

I hope that at some point the SDP faction (Hancock, Cable, Russell, etc) walk off in a huff. Their ideas are poisonous socialism wrapped in an extra dose of piety.

Ok granted - I was thinking in terms of the major political groupings in the UK. Concur there are 'Gladstone' liberals - but they are really on the margins aren't they

hmc No, some liberals are social democrats. People like Vince Cable and Simon Hughes.

Many liberals are, in fact, "Gladstone liberals" - people like Nick Clegg, David Laws, Jeremy Browne etc.

I am a bit suprised at some of these posts

Liberals in UK are really Social democrats

saucetastic - that's what it used to mean about 100 years or so ago in the UK. Liberal equated to supporter of free market, limited state etc. That is now an anachronism

yes guardian voters are a lost cause, they believe every word of progressives like Ben Wiseacre and George Monbiodiversity. They will never wake up and see sense. But the working class never believed Monbiodiversity and all the rest of them. They always preferred Maggie, because they could see that she was for real, just like them, not like the champagne Charlies on the Guardian, these champagne class warriors who pretend that they have the interests of the working class at heart.

Yes - Cameron and Osborne spent too long chasing Guardian voters when they should have been chasing the traditional working-class Thatcher votes.

The ability to buy your own council house, the battle with Scargill etc made Thatcher a heroine to many working-class people. The "grocer's daughter" had a real cachet - a no-nonsense authenticity which Cameron just can't match, however hard he tries.

He has shown some real steel in the decisions he has taken. He is a really good communicator - probably almost as good as Tony Blair. I think over time the plumbers, electricians and builders of Britain will come to like Camero, but I don't think they will ever love him in the same way they adored Maggie.

Thatcherism is now going out of fashion and many of the current Tory generation are not really fans of it. But it was Thatcherism that appealed to the working class and got them to abandon Labour. Many of the working class finally felt like stakeholders. Thatcher recognised their aspirations and offered a meritocratic society, where old Tory toffs in bowler hats had to compete with barrow boys in the City, and the barrow boys often came out on top.

In Thatcher's meritocratic society, a working class lad like Alan Sugar made his fortune. The working class broke free from the chains with which the socialists had enslaved them for so long. They didn't want to return to the penury, poverty and deprivation that was promised them by the progressives.

But alas, good things never last. The progressives, disguised themselves, copied Thatcher's ideas, whilst shamelessly deriding her, scrapped all of their former policies and so-called principles, in order to grasp at power. Unfortunately we had to live through what they did. But after a dessicating drought comes righteous rain, and we finally have the good old Tories back in power again.

Liberals are not libertarians. They believe in pluralist/multilateral politics, well regulated but ultimately free markets, they do not dictate social mores, in theory (though not in practice) they believe in evidence-based policy-making.

Traditional left-wingery has been far more authoritarian - punishing the rich, giving money to the poor. There is a much greater tradition of "solidarity" in various forms - unions being the obvious examples. They are often quite socially small-c conservative. They believe in controlling markets (not just regulating them).

Toryism (especially One-Nation) is rooted in a respect for institutions and traditions - with change coming through evolution rather than revolution. There is a slightly authoritarian streak here too but with a very different flavour - they prefer to call it "paternalist". They believe that family action is better than social action, and that social action is better than state action. They believe in "quiet" patriotism, and very much in Burke's "litte platoons".

Cameron and Clegg are both essentially Liberal Tories or Conservative Liberal - with Clegg usually more liberal, and Cameron more Tory, obviously.

Thatcherism is a pretty new form of Conservatism. It usually, but not always, blends well with traditional Tory.

The Tories have already scrapped bin fines so that poor pensioners no longer feel the cold hand of socialism on their neck. They intend to do much more to ease the burden on teh citizens of this country.

because the socialists, as usual, regulate and tax the ordinary struggling, working people but they let their fatcat friends like 'Fred the Shred' carry on regardless. The Tories would have regulated 'Fred the Shred' and reduced taxes for the ordinary working people.

"it's just that the left tends towards greater social freedom and more financial control and the right are the opposite"

how can you explain the erosion of civil liberties, political correctness and fining of pensioners for not closing their bin lids as not being social control by the socialists? Socialists exist to ensure social control, they are about the social, the communitarian, the communist, as opposed to the freedom and liberty of the individual. The coalition is busy unravelling all of the socaila control and the financial coontrol introduced by the controlling, nanny state, regulative socialists. It is tearing up hundreds of their controlling laws and consigning them to the bin.

The socialists are about social control, but they are also all about financial control, through their punitive taxation and their punitive fines on pensioners. The Tories are about freedom, in both the social sphere and the financial economic sphere, which is why the working class voted for Thatcher, to escape the deadly grip of the controlling, suffocating socialists.

Hello, interesting question and I've really enjoyed reading the replies. As very different breeds of Liberal Democrat, I talk about this a lot with my husband (we don't have a TV and don't get out much.We have to make our own entertainment!).

I think that Prolesworths description of a liberal is actually the way that I would describe a libertarian- i.e. being ideologically opposed to state organisation or control, even if it brings about certain social, financial or moral benefits. I think that liberalism in the British (as opposed to US) sense of the word means something like 'the greatest freedom for the greatest number' in that certain controls or the withdrawal of certain freedoms (such as paying tax to enable a welfare state) enable more 'freedom' in other senses.

I think that there is such a thing as both the 'liberal left' and 'liberal right' but neither is inherently more liberal than the other- it's just that the left tends towards greater social freedom and more financial control and the right are the opposite (although that's a massive generalisation.).

Has anyone read The Orange Book? A really interesting set of chapters (well, I've only managed four) on 'redefining liberalism'.

Yes you are right. I think that lefties have perverted the word "freedom". Most of us view it as being allowed to do what we want within the law and without interference. Lefties want to pretend that they are champions of freedom, but they don't believe in freedom as it is understood by most of us. That's why they risk being called illiberal and are different to liberals.

They get round this by pretending that they are liberal by changing the meaning of the word "freedom". They say that freedom is freedom from poverty etc. and that therefore the end justifies the means in eradicating poverty to restore freedom. This often means redistribution of wealth. Their freedom is the freedom to rob Peter to pay Paul.