In thinking that Left = Good and Right = Bad has gone too far?

[WilmaFlintstone1]

A few things have made me pause in the last few days and I realised I have become increasingly irritated by the Left vs Right discourse,

Take the recent spat between Lee Anderson and Jack Monroe. Now neither of them covered themselves in glory but I don’t think demonising him because he is Tory and praising Jack because she is a Lefty is right. They both have deep flaws and neither is getting it right.

The Margaret Thatcher statue is another thing. Why are people pelting it with eggs? Firstly in a country where there are food shortages it’s immoral to be doing this. Secondly I am not getting the wholesale glee with which certain commentators are reporting it. The very woke lot being all “hey, people are selling eggs by the statue” to wholesale amusement. I just keep thinking “FFS get over yourselves.”

Now I hated Margaret Thatcher BUT she was the first female PM which was in itself a massive step forwards. I am not about to go pelting her statue with eggs, yes I’d rather the investment has been put into local services in that community but pelting a statue with eggs won’t change that.

Its become as though some people will pass any behaviour because it’s Lefties sticking it to the Right.

For removal of all speculation I’d probably consider myself a Lefty and they tend to get my vote…for what that’s worth in my heavily Blue area

isn’t it possible that there are deep flaws both sides?

I agree that it's incredibly complex but Thatcher addressed it by trying to make it sound incredibly simple - you were either lazy or enterprising.

I have no idea what the solution is but I do think there must be a way in which there is a safety net which allows a decent standard for all and which encourages us to want that that, rather than demonising each other.

Exactly! And I get that so much of life is luck, so surely this can be factored in by people who are in the position to do so.

@Fluval

Ah, the predicted response from a leftie.

Mirror image of the leftie types I am criticising? I don't think so mate.

Calling someone a intolerant far-left wokie, is hardly the same as calling someone a vile, racist, bigoted piece of gammon, wishing death on them (as lefties do about Tory MPs,) and saying they'd love to throw acid in their face (as Jo Brand did about Nigel Farage.)

Nice try though. 3 out of 10.

Full marks however (10 out of 10,) for proving me right about far-left wokies. Denying what they're like and pretending the abhorrent far-left wokie behaviour doesn't exist.

I do think the right are unfairly demonised- leaving party politics out of it for a minute.

You do need conservative instincts in a society, just as you need progressive instincts, like both brakes and accelerator in a car.

It seems to need that those instincts are part of a personality trait rather than a thought out position based on political party manifesto. Which in a two party system leads an awful lot of people to hold their noses while voting.

Left and right are breaking down as categories really. There isn't much left wing in economics, it's all shades of neo liberalism and globalisation.
There's not much right wing on social issues, it's all progressivism with varying levels of disrespect shown to traditional ways of organising sexual and reproductive ethics and family formation. Except for one guiding principle, the wishes of the individual (coded right) dismissing entirely the effects on society (coded left).

You plainly don’t have any interest in having a good faith discussion.

In my post, I acknowledged and condemned the more toxic behaviours of some on the left (particularly online) and yet you accuse of me of ‘denying what their like and pretending the don’t exist’.

And because some on the left make death threats or other threats of violence to conservative (or other right wing) MPs, you tar every left wing person with that behaviour. Of course you will also be aware that left wing politicians similarly receive regular threats of violence from the right, but apparently you’re happy to overlook that.

Basically, you write as a person who sees the world through a strictly tribal left/right lense, where every last person on the left is guilty by association with the worst on their side of the divide, without applying the same standard to the right.

When the OP said she thinks the narrative of Left Wing = Good, Right = Bad has gone to far, I don’t think it was intended as an invitation for people to argue the opposite is true.

The Overton window has shifted so much that half of us aren’t sure where the boundary between left and right is, or which side we are now on.

It does feel to me that both ends are getting more extreme again, but that could be middle age having an effect on me.

What's needed imo, is some sort of overlord to shatter current systems through conquest and eradicate all dissent

thebestwaytoscareatory Wow. You actually want to live in a society where dissent is banned? Well there’s always North Korea….

Yes and no, I said some sort of overlord needs to shatter our current systems and eradicate all dissent if we are to progress as a species, not that I want to live in a society with no dissent. Depending on what this fictional overlord's ultimate goal was I might prefer to be one of those who are culled.

Imo humans are too tribal and will always divide themselves into opposing groups over something (and I'm as guilty of that as the next person). This will always prevent us progressing beyond this level of civilisation. You can't hope to tackle global or existential issues/threats if everyone has their own strong beliefs on what is and isn't a threat, what course of action should/shouldn't be taken, and who should/shouldn't be effected by said actions. Thus you need someone to force us all to work towards a common goal and not pursue individualistic ambitions.

The armed forces are probably a good example, in that everyone knows their role and follows the chain of command. Not everyone will agree with the course of action, or what the end goal is, but everyone will follow orders and work to reach the objective. Imagine how ineffective an army would be if all the different divisions just went about doing what they thought was best.

But it's all just ramblings from me, we won't change. The next 50 years or so will be the closing overtures of the Western Capitalist Civilisation that has dominated for the past few centuries. As I said, it's to be expected really, it happens time and time again from the Babylonians and Egyptians to the Romans and Ottomans.

The only issue is that thanks to technological advances we have escaped the usual and natural checks and balances that spur on population decline and keep us from causing too many issues and are now more than likely going to collapse the global ecosystems that support our very ability to thrive or even survive.

Here's hoping the overlord shows up soon.

Not everyone will agree with the course of action, or what the end goal is, but everyone will follow orders and work to reach the objective

Sounds to me like communism or fascism.
I agree though that there will be some major global catastrophe which will wipe out many millions of people. Whether it will be a natural catastrophe such as famine or disease or whether it will be manmade such as a nuclear bomb, I have no idea.

I understand the point you’re trying to make, @Thebestwaytoscareatory , even if the idea of a global overlord isn’t exactly appealing.

It reminds me of that recent game The Financial Times created where, in order to stop global temperatures rising by more than 1.5
degrees before 2050, you are appointed as the Global Minister for Climate Affairs (or something).

Even with one person able to make worldwide decisions, without any checks and balances, it took very aggressive policy decisions to ‘save the world’, as it were.

The odds of that being achieved with all countries working independently, informed by their own short-term, self-interest, seem vanishingly small.

haven't RTFT but will do so after posting this. It has never been about left = good, right = bad for anyone with an ounce of sense.

It is a modern thing that things must be black and white and no shade of nuance at all. It is entirely possible, as i am, to be (very) left leaning but also recognise that small c conservatives, especially in local politics, have the best of intentions - similar intentions to the left - in that they want to improve the lives of locals and increase local wealth. The difference is the path they believe is the right one to get there. There may be differences too in the amount of acceptable inequality (generally speaking i think the right = haul yourself up by your bootstraps no help is available and left = help is available everyone will contribute to that. But again there is nuance)

I loathed Thatcher, still do and see the current government as a direct result of policies she cemented if not actually set rolling. But she was a woman who played by their rules (the men running everything) and turned it round on a lot of them in the end. I see a statue to the first female PM as absolutely right. I abhor the waste of food but it is everyone's right to chuck stuff at it too. I've said it elsewhere but it can be seen as performance art: angry yahoos chucking stuff at it, angry local conservatives cleaning it off again ad infinitum. We should sell tickets to benefit the local foodbank)

OP this is why social media isn't for politics. This lazy left right thing is more to fit into Twitter posts. As such, both words have become lazy, stereotypical, thrown as insults, loaded words with literally no thought behind them when they're used in politics discussions on twitter or facebook. Always best to take this stuff offline, or at least not on social media.

I said some sort of overlord needs to shatter our current systems and eradicate all dissent if we are to progress as a species, not that I want to live in a society with no dissent.

I have long argued that what is needed is a benevolent dictatorship for a century or so to get the ball rolling.

Talk about how you can "just earn more" or that a family with 2 NMW earners should be able to feed themselves miss the point that there is a housing crisis, and that this extra work is just not there. Or not there to many many people. It is a tactic of many companies to not give people full time hours in a bid to not give them full time employee rights/benefits. Tales of people on zero hours NMW contracts turning down a shift for valid reasons (they already worked 27 days in a row, must take a kid/granny/themselves for an urgent appointment) and then being punished by being given fewer hours or the shittiest shifts are not lies.

PP mentioned that Thatcher got people owning stuff. Fine - first if you don't believe that all property is theft and also fine if you are replenishing the stock of social housing so that people can start out on a low paid job and still be able to save for a deposit. See? Nuanced. Ownership of housing good. Hoovering it up by the landlord classes - not good because we see where that led. Owning stocks - fine, but the first responsibility of a company is towards share holders not employees who, let's face it, are the ones who make the company's wealth for the most part.

Ad infinitum.

I have studied and worked in Politics in academia and I can tell you that most people don't even agree on what left and right wing politics actually means. I don't mean that there aren't accepted academic definitions but more that everyone has their own individual interpretation.

My idea of what is 'left' or 'right' wing will probably differ from several other people's on this thread. It just becomes a self-label that is used to differentiate yourself from others and then demonise the 'other', like we do in so many other areas of life. The Tories 'don't care about the poor' or 'are sleazy' or 'can't be trusted' and Labour 'run up massive welfare bills' or 'are too woke' or 'want a nanny state'. I think in most cases it has little to do with what either Labour or the Tories have actually done or not done, because tbh they are both as bad as each other, just in different ways.

But to someone who feels that being 'left wing' or 'right wing' is part of their identity, me making that statement is a threat to their identity and they will defend 'their side' with evidence cherry picked to suit their narrative, while ignoring other evidence. I've seen it happen so many times.

I have long argued that what is needed is a benevolent dictatorship for a century or so to get the ball rolling.

Brefugee Presumably you only want a left wing dictatorship, not a right wing one.

We already have that.

Secondly I am not getting the wholesale glee with which certain commentators are reporting it. The very woke lot being all “hey, people are selling eggs by the statue” to wholesale amusement. I just keep thinking “FFS get over yourselves.”

Do you wholesale eggs by any chance?

@Brefugee very well put. The problem is that the small 'c' conservatives have been drowned out by the extremist neo-liberal ultra capitalist Conservatives who are only interested in enriching a very small group of already wealthy people. Populist politics is just one tool in their arsenal, as is the narrative of the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor.

I have quite a few friends and family who are small 'c' conservatives and have always voted along those lines - they are finally disillusioned enough to stay home and not vote at all.

This benefits no-one. We need a better politics where everyone's voice is represented and we need a better society where it's not possible to be unable to afford food in one of the richest countries on the planet.

I think this is part of the reason why right wing governments have been in power for years though.

What do the left actually do, other than characterise themselves as the goodies and the Tories as the baddies? And tell people that if they don't agree with them about Jeremy Corbyn or trans women then they may as well go and vote for the Tories?

If Labour behaved like an actual government in waiting and came up with some attractive policies which actually appeal to a majority of the electorate, and showed themselves to be people capable of running a country, they would be in power by now.

But as it is, we've got a choice between Boris Johnson and the clowns talking nonsense about cervixes and generally fiddling while Rome burns.

There is no “landlord class” though. You have all sorts of people renting out a property, ranging from the Duke of Westminster at the richer end down to someone illegally sub-letting their council property out when they move in with a partner, and myriad different sorts of people in between.

I don’t think demonising him because he is Tory and praising Jack because she is a Lefty is right

I don't know what you are seeing, but it's certainly not the thread on mumsnet about it. Jack Monroe is being demonised just as much if not more than Lee Anderson.

I think people think Right=Bad because this Tory government run by liars, rapists and corrupt cunts has fucked the UK over the last 12 years.

Jack Monroe, for all her flaws is not responsible for any of it.

SamReiver there may not be a landlord class as such, but there are large numbers of MPs, many of them Tory, who hold large rental portfolios and who voted en bloc against legislation to make rented properties fit for human habitation. That is mind-blowingly awful behaviour.

The problem is that reducing everything to LEFT v RIGHT is only going to end in a polarised and subsequently toxic debate.

I'd invite people to familiarise themselves with en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass and take the test. You might be surprised at the results. Here are mine:

Economic Left/Right: -3.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.59

This benefits no-one. We need a better politics where everyone's voice is represented and we need a better society where it's not possible to be unable to afford food in one of the richest countries on the planet.

agree @pointythings the extremists are pushing the centrists away from voting and that is good for nobody

There is no “landlord class” though.

I disagree not everyone who rents out an apartment/house is a landlord in that meaning, and not all landlords are blood-sucking parasites of course. But it should not be that people can't afford to live relatively close to where they work, and it should not be that vast swathes of ex-council houses have been hoovered up by one or two individuals. If Covid taught us nothing else, it taught us that the words "key worker" is not restricted to people like surgeons and paramedics, and they should not have to live 2 hours away from their jobs.