To seriously wonder what it will take for the Left to realise hurling insults at their core voters won't win votes?

[basketoffreshveg]

guardian link

Now, I realise the above is about Trump, but if I didn't have to get ready for work I am sure I could find easily enough any number of articles from the last twelve months stating that core Labour voters are too stupid to know what is good for them, wrong, misguided, naive, foolish and poor judges of political and economical climates.

I keep thinking that at any key moment the light will go on and the penny will drop and the left will realise and identify this is the very problem and why they aren't being elected.

They aren't losing because of stupid voters but largely because these voters dislike being called stupid. I am not necessarily advocating a U turn insofar as policies go but in the way they are presented to the electorate.

Yet after every crushing blow I see articles like the one above and I have to reach the conclusion that there is a serious disconnect here as if I can identify the source of the problem and Labour/left seemingly cannot, and I am no genius, I truly can't see them ever getting back in.

sorry, overuse of 'interesting' there

Take Trumps 'racist' allegations, it is based on the premise that he said 'all Mexicans are rapists, drug dealers etc...' and was pushed by left mainstream media worldwide, when he clearly didn't say any such thing and was discussing illegal Mexican immigrant and human traffickers.

Oh! He called illegal Mexican immigrants rapists, criminals and drug traffickers. That's alright then.

Slarti - Ah, so you get to tell others what they should post but the moment someone spots your hypocrisy you immediately try to shut them down. Post whatever you like, of course, but don't expect anyone to believe you are opposed to racism when you are constantly attacking those who challenge it. At least own it eh?

Firstly, I am not attacking anyone, telling anyone what they should post or shutting anyone down.

Secondly, the title of this thread, as you know, is

AIBU To seriously wonder what it will take for the Left to realise hurling insults at their core voters won't win votes?

So far your comments have included saying that

a) no-one on the left is throwing insults at the left's core voters (which I take to mean other people on the left). i.e. that any labels of racist being thrown around are correctly assigned.

Slarti - I think some people are trying way too hard to be victims. It must be exhausting. In the real world, the last 6 months has seen a rise in racism, sexism and disablism. Some people have challenged that. Get over it. If you haven't been part of that then it isn't about you. Please stop trying to silence and vilify the left though

b) people who argue this point with you are not "really" on the left anyway.

Slarti - The whole raison d'etre of this thread was to make sweeping generalisations about the left so forgive me if I don't take your victimhood seriously or your claim to be left wing while simultaneously attacking people just for being left wing. The hypocrisy is astounding

c) I (as in me, WrongTrouser) am racist, when I disagree with you about a sarcastic comment you make to me.

Slarti - Post whatever you like, of course, but don't expect anyone to believe you are opposed to racism when you are constantly attacking those who challenge it. At least own it eh?

You may think these are convincing arguments. Really, they are not.

On a) we can argue till the cows come home about a particular PT article, but if you have never, ever seen anyone on the left call, for example, all leave voters (which includes plenty of people on the left) racists and stupid, then I think you must have been living in a cave for the last few month. There are certainly lots and lots of posters on this thread who have seen it. At best, perhaps some comments are ambiguous and open to interpretation. Even if that is the case, it is obvious from the response to the OP that lots of people feel the same, so perhaps people like PT need to choose their words more carefully (charitable interpretation - I think PT knows exactly what she's doing).

On b) well this is an odd one and I need to choose my words carefully but I have honestly never come across someone on the left who is (I am not sure how to express it but) possessive about "membership" of the left. The point of political ideas is to convince others of them and share them This is the only way to gain any political power, without which ideas are just ideas. You seem very keen to define people out of the left who define themselves as left wing. I don't understand that.

On c) all I can say is that I am finding it slightly ironic that you keep stating that you have never seen anyone on the left hurling insults like racist, with no evidence at other people on the left, and then your answer to me is "I disgree with you, and you haven't posted something I think you should have so you are racist" (paraphrase, for clarity). Well there's one example then.

Please don't take this post the wrong way. I know there is a lot of anger over Brexit, Trump, the Labour Party, racism etc etc, and the referendum has caused, or perhaps just highlighted, a lot of division on the left, and supporters of the left (who I call the left). The answer is to try and find what common ground there is, not to keep stoking division.

I found this article interesting. It is a speech given in May 2014 by Sunder Katwala called "Less racist, but more anxious".

www.britishfuture.org/articles/less-racist-anxious/

Excerpt

"Hope Not Hate produced an excellent analysis, ‘Fear and Hope’, which I think helps to navigate and understand the challenges of identity and belonging in Britain today.

About a quarter of people hold strongly liberal views, which extend well beyond rejecting racism. This liberal minority are pro-diversity and confident about the pace of change. They are certain they would vote to stay in the EU. They believe immigration brings enough positive benefits to be keen to maintain the high levels of immigration we have in Britain today. If you went to university (or teach at one), and live and work in London, then you are more likely to be in this cosmopolitan tribe.

Another quarter of the population think that all sounds pretty close to utter madness – sometimes holding the liberal group responsible for everything that they think has gone wrong with Britain today. This includes the racist rump of one in 10, who still support biological racism, and deny that non-white Britons can be equally British. But the political projects dominated by this group are defunct and dying.

By contrast, the larger minority (of 15%) described by Hope Not Hate as “latently hostile”, still have an important political impact. This group rejects the ‘old racism’ as wrong. They are not just deeply unsettled by the pace of change, but often animated by the politics of grievance. This group doesn’t just want migration reduced; they want to shut the border. UKIP’s ‘Party of No’ messages are often pitch perfect for this group, which forms the base of the UKIP vote, though the party can have a broader appeal, especially in European elections.

The anxious middle

It is striking how many of our public debates can get stuck in this polarisation. Open versus closed, as in the Clegg versus Farage televised debates.

Yet the most interesting conclusion of the Hope Not Hate report is that the majority of the population is in neither the liberal nor the anti-liberal minorities, but in the anxious broad centre of public opinion.

For one half of the anxious middle, the deal-breaker is economic insecurity: are there fair opportunities for me and my children?

For one half of the anxious middle, the deal-breaker is cultural identity. Is Britain still Britain? Will we have a shared society, or a segregated, fearful and divided one?"

and

"How to secure anti-prejudice norms

My core argument is that an effective anti-racist project must secure strong majority support, ensuring it engages these middle groups, so that it can extend and entrench anti-prejudice norms.

It is by engaging legitimate anxieties, held by people who can be shown to be in the market for workable solutions that bring people together, that illegitimate and prejudiced views can be isolated and marginalised.

By contrast, arguments which resonate only with the minority liberal quarter cannot do this. They are unable to protect broad social norms – for the simple reason that they do not have sufficient reach.

Choosing to polarise debates from a liberal minority position can run serious risks of damaging anti-prejudice norms, rather than protecting them. This may marginalise not the claim being attacked, but the liberal challenge to it, particularly by alienating the persuadable centre of public opinion.

In Britain in 2014, the attitudinal evidence suggests that the median citizen is a pretty good judge of core racism and anti-prejudice norms. Campaigners can work to extend norms over time, but that will be persuasive by engaging people. Shouting racist when the case is unclear, where the validity of the label is being contested not by rejectionist opinion, but by the moderate centre-ground of public opinion, will very rarely persuade beyond the already converted."

Sorry - both my posts were very long

very interesting though

Chatting casually after a meeting in the City recently, the woman I was with assumed I was a Remainer and said she had cancelled a night because some people going were Brexiters and clearly horrible racists. She got quite shiny with indignation at her own moral virtue.

She then took a call from her DH who was at their holiday house in Europe (!) overseeing renovations.

She told him not to leave the site because she'd been told the builders would nick things.

It made me smile all the way home.

night out*.

She wasn't that influential!

wrong I'm getting tired of being badgered by you. You tell others what they should be doing, yet when I asked why you didn't practice what you preached you fell back to claiming victimhood. I sense no genuine desire to engage in debate, just to vilify the left and posters with left wing views.

PrettyBotanicals I always remember a sentence in the late George Jackson's book 'Soledad Brother' (Black Power movement in the 60s). He was remarking on what a good guy a particular white man was who was living in a commune, was a musician, very right-on with the brothers etc.

His friend replied to the effect Those are the worst kind of motherfu**s; they march with us but they don't see their racism, only others. It makes them feel good.

But in your story, I don't think it's necessarily cognitive dissonance. It could be that that is her experience several times over, or that of a friend.

Slarti I am not badgering you, I am answering you. Sorry if the post with the three questions followed by the other post seemed badgery, it wasn't meant to. You accused me of not being against racism, that is not true and I defended myself. I have no wish to engage further with you either. If you can just not make any more false accusations against me, I will not need to respond.

I am entitled to, and will, defend myself against slurs and false accusations.

I sense no genuine desire to engage in debate, just to vilify the left and posters with left wing views

I've said it before, I'm not sure why you are struggling with it so much - I am on the left and have left wing views. I am not vilifying the left and people with left wing views (which would mean myself). I am saying that some people on the left, who are doing so, shouldn't insult other people on the left who they disagree with on certain issues.

I really would rather not engage any further with you, and will not do so unless you feel the need to make any further accusations or slurs against me, in which case I will, of course, defend myself.

Such an interesting quoted speech from Sunder Katwala, so much of that rings true for me.

*Pizanfan"
"Take Trumps 'racist' allegations, it is based on the premise that he said 'all Mexicans are rapists, drug dealers etc...' and was pushed by left mainstream media worldwide, when he clearly didn't say any such thing and was discussing illegal Mexican immigrant and human traffickers."

No accusing Trump of being racist is not based on one comment. I've copied this from another thread.

Trump is a racist.
Called Mexican's rapists on many occasions.
Said a judge with Mexican heritage could not be impartial.
He refused to rent homes to black people - Justice Department ruling.
Trump refuses to condem violence against Black and Hispanic people.
Trump, seriously, misrepresents levels of black on white violence.
Trump was fined for forcing Black people off the gambling floor in one of his casinos.

These are just the highlights. All are provable. Government investigations have found he has acted in racist ways.

Trumps racism is unarguable, yet it is ignored and dismissed.
Common sense does seem to be "believe what I say with no evidence". Anecdotal evidence is not really evidence.
This is what we call 'post truth'. My friend saw it so it must be true. Refusing to believe facts.
When the left (and others) point this out they are patronising and dismissive. Sadly, the use of facts can harm your argument.

What a fucking mess.

Pretty, I posted up thread about 2 local schools where I live and how Brexiters don't choose the local school where it's 18% white British, it's this kind of xenophobia / racism, because that's plainly what it is, that the sneery left don't acknowledge, and what pisses off lefties like me who have the very temerity to vote Out and not be a scummy racist.

" Shouting racist when the case is unclear" Sunder Katwala

Very interesting speech and she makes some interesting points. But, my point continues to be some racism ( on this thread?) like Trumps is not unclear, it is not subtle, it is obvious and people still deny it.

People see what they want to see and when the truth is forced upon them they blame the person who has ripped the veil away not the person committing the wrongdoing.

For the record, I didn't want Trump to win... I didn't believe he was remotely suitable for the presidency.... However, I don't think Liberals help when they exaggerate and misrepresent his comments. Here's Trump's infamous Mexico quote...

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

He's neither calling all Mexicans racists nor even Mexican immigrants. He's cutting through the bull to say what he believed to be the truth... Mexican immigration has led to crime, and he's serious about doing something about it. Unfortunately the fact liberals refuse to call as spade a spade allows someone like Trump to fill the vacuum.

Well ta for attempting to co-opt my experiences as a disabled person for your rant against the French family, Southall.

But the restructuring of the disability benefits system was an idealogical decision by New Labour under the guidance of David Freud and Frank Field, with the encouragement of private insurance companies like UNUM which are expecting to make significant profits from the slashing of the welfare state.

The Tories eagerly continued Labour's programme and brought in even more cuts for disabled people.

And it has the grand total of Fuck All to do with immigrants of any stamp.

So excuse me if I don't redirect my legitimate anger about disability cuts towards some unemployed French bloke.

However much you seem to wish me to.

In fact, though there's no guarantee that a growing economy would be directed towards supporting disabled people more (certainly not under this govt), it's pretty certain that a shrinking economy will lead to further cuts for us.

So I'm expecting a reduction in growth to be making things worse for most disabled people over the next few years.

Hillary just as racist:

Called black people super predators???
Supported building a wall along the Mexican border back in 2005???
Made anti-semitic comments in her emails???
Supported incarceration policies that have seen a disproportionate number of black people imprisoned???
Gave rise to the rumour that Obama is a Muslim???
Hiring black people to turn up at Trump rallies to cause disruptions/violence???

All of these things are supported by evidence. All of them point to her being no better, morally, than Trump. So I suppose everyone who voted for her is implicitly racist too.

Well ta for attempting to co-opt my experiences as a disabled person for your rant against the French family, Southall. So excuse me if I don't redirect my legitimate anger about disability cuts towards some unemployed French bloke. However much you seem to wish me to

What on earth are you on about? I don't know you or your situation. You can direct your anger at anyone you want, but of course not the unemployed French bloke and his ten kids in receipt of 40k+ per year, oh no. Finite pot of money, many things not being taken care of. Not difficult to fathom why, but dogma prevents you naming the bleedin' obvious.

No, Southall, it's your dogma blinding you.

The disability cuts were planned well before the financial crash 2008. Nothing to do with any finite pot of money or affordability. Pure ideology. Read the 2007 Freud Report.

There was never any intention to continue to support disabled people properly, even if the money was available.

And how do you imagine money will be available, anyway, if the economy doesn't grow?

Oh! He called illegal Mexican immigrants rapists, criminals and drug traffickers. That's alright then.

I think this is a problem with what the op was alluding too, I have not found any confirmed quote that he actually called illegal immigrants rapists etc, the context is there to see, but the "left" ignored that and extrapolated it to mean all, something which they refuse to acknowledge when describing large parts of northern England and even trump supporters as white supremacists.

Doublethink at best

And yes, you are attempting to capitalise on my actual suffering from the cuts (mine along with so many other people's), for your anti-immigration narrative.

The disability cuts were planned well before the financial crash 2008

So rolls into labours territory then?

Is this the "elite" that people are voting against, so which side is good and which side is bad?