This post nails it about left wing voters on Mumsnet over the last two days

[ProudAmberTurtle]

It's by an ex-academic on X, about posts on Reddit over the last 48 hours but is equally applicable to Mumsnet, where I can seeing posts stating things like:

"How stupid are Reform voters? Don't they realise they'll get fewer benefits?!"

The irony is of course that it's those posters who need to be educated, not the working class voters they mock because they think they're thick.

Here you go:

Reading through Reddit threads in which leftists/progressives express their bewilderment/confusion/fury at working class English voters for casting their lot in with Reform, one of the things I'm starting to understand is this:

They simply do not understand how a government could help working-class people in any other way besides giving them benefits, handouts, and other free things.

Their entire mental architecture is premised upon the premises that

1. Working class people are poor
2. The only way for them to not be poor is for the state to give them free stuff
3. So left-wing parties need to promise them lots of free stuff

Then, when these working-class voters instead vote for right-of-centre parties who instead promise an economy in which they can build a career, start their own business, make a financial success of themselves and start a family, they're confused.

Because, again, in their mental architecture, what the working class are supposed to want is free benefits from the state.

But what they actually want is a fair shake at making their own way in the world, making money, getting on in life.

And the left simply doesn't understand that what these voters want from the state is an economy in which they can actually do this.

x.com/i/status/2053073719086469193

Agree OP. Though I’d say the calling Reform voters stupid is the typical lefty position. Funny how middle class left wing people calling working class people stupid and racist for over two decades has led to working class people leaving the Labour Party rather than joining it. Funnier still that left wing people are not spotting this pattern so that they keep on doing it. Now that’s. what I call stupid.

It’s why I left the Labour Party. Realizing the contempt these people had for working class people.

Great post! Will they ever realise the damage they do. And it is a societal damage. They do not realise that the vitriol they express when labelling everyone who has an opinion different to theirs; racist, fascist, stupid idiots, lied to….whatever, whatever, is the exact same behaviour of the actual racists, fascists, stupid idiots, they aim to denigrate.

But they convince themselves that they insult and hate from the virtuosic, moral high ground and therefore they are the nice people and their hatred and name calling is justified. They need to take a good look at themselves.

Maybe that is their problem, they spend to much time looking outwards and have lost the ability to self reflect.

Yes such a great post, moaning that those on the centre left call Reform voters "stupid" BUT then goes on to call M/C Labour voters stupid...

Couldn't make it up....

If people think Reform is the party for working class people, they have been hoodwinked.

Reform voters can't even explain what their policies are, only something about immigration.

Works both ways doesn’t it. Each as bad as the other and each to their own. The point I was making.

what is a badgering plus emojis?

ES’s bete noire. Hates emojis with a passion.

For once we agree. With a passion.

Quote : "But they convince themselves that they insult and hate from the virtuosic, moral high ground and therefore they are the nice people and their hatred and name calling is justified. They need to take a good look at themselves."

"moral high ground" is a bit tricky though is it not? Because it has changed over the years. For example, a Church Minister might claim they had the moral high ground for lambasting couples "living in sin", or having kids out of wedlock. A slavery abolitionist would have claimed the moral high ground in their time. So morals do change, and so does the moral high ground?

And as morals change, old morals of 70 rears ago get thrown out ( such as living in sin), and new morals come in, or gain more weight ( racism is bad).

So instead of saying "moral high ground" and then maybe having to define what you mean, would it not be better to just say what specific morals you mean ?

And I don't think I have ever heard anyone on the left say " I have the moral high ground so you are wrong". And I reckon that is likely because of the issues of how morals are defined. As mentioned above.

If I, as a left person say, "Racism is morally wrong", that is not me claiming the moral high ground. That is me stating a universally accepted fact.

And this, to me anyway, is where confusion comes in. Because things are being said ambiguously with sweeping statements. And as you see from many posts on this thread, it can be, and is, really difficult to pin down what many people are actually saying.

They have been hoodwinked by Labour first for 20+ years.

Farage is not working class, but at least, he listens to what they say.
That's how you make friends and win people.

Left political movements have actually never emanated from the working classes. From Marx and Engels to the current Labour apparatus, it's always been "intellectuals" who think they know better, hate they are not in power and want to rule everything.

They have fought initially for the working classes, not only to emancipate said working classes, but also (a lot) to get rid of the power structures that were in place and replace them with their own. And we can all see how it has turned out for Russia, Cuba, North Korea, etc. It never emancipated the working classes as much as creating a new power structure over them (and being utterly sh*t at economy because they want to centralise and decide everything rather than let ppl be their own agents, politically and economically, without freedom of expression or political rights)

And since globalisation, the local working classes or the economy are not interesting them anymore. It would be too hard and contradict their own agenda to bring the jobs back. They prefer to focus on controlling society and moulding it to their wishes and values.

I didn’t say I hated them. Read what I wrote.

My accountant emails me and uses emoji’s. I grit my teeth and bare it. Urggh!

Farage pretends to listen

Left political movements have actually never emanated from the working classes.

Never heard of the Tolpuddle Martyrs? Peterloo massacre?

Yours is head space on that I do.

Yep. It’s always Labour on here too. I doubt they have much cause for the laughing part of crying laughing anymore.

The Left has not only pretended for 20y, it now actively wants to shut up people (against the rules of democracy and free expression) and shame them.

Look at you, stop looking at Nigel, the problem comes from the Left.
You ain't the modern saints you think you are.

Nothing to do with the Right?

Look at Reform's MP's, where did they come from? Reform's voters mostly came from the Tories.

Vote Reform but don't blame the 'Left' for your choice.

Workers were fighting for their rights and there has been a lot of grassroots activism and political fights, but the academic left has sold them on the idea that their marxist ideological apparatus was the one that would solve their issues.

Between asking for fair pay and working conditions and demanding the dictatorship of the proletariat, there was actually a gap...

They had common goals for a while, but it is not the case anymore.

Reform voters come more from Labour or never voted I believe. Doesn't really matter.

The Left has corrupted the political debate for decades, because it has refused to address heads on very important issues and has coerced ppl into silence. They have stifled debate and dissension. It's on them.

Now I am going back to work, you have all a lovely day

No, you are wrong on where Reform voters come from.

The Left has hardly been in power in the UK.

So why not blame the Right as well?

As for Reform, follow the money.

Well we don’t then.

You make a fair point. Perhaps ‘moral high ground’ wasn’t the tidiest phrase.

My concern isn’t that people have strong moral beliefs. We all do. My concern is that some people become so certain of their own virtue that they stop being curious about why others disagree.

Once disagreement is considered evidence of bad character rather than a difference of opinion, debate collapses into labelling and contempt.

The big problem with any political system, especially Marxism that is supposed to come from the proletariat, is that pretty much no matter how it is done, the proletariat that becomes the new leaders will tend to become a new elite.

The UK is, to an extent, protected from this going too far, because our system can, and does. have a feed of new proletariat. Angela Raynor, John Prescot. Sadiq Khan etc. Yes they can become a new elite in their time , but they can and do get replaced with new "non elite" proletariat.

The Tories of course tend to work on selecting the already elite for elections.

But you appear to be saying that Reform will be totally immune to this universal feature of politics. That they are different. They have cracked it.

Even though they are starting out with the elite already as their leaders.

And then you said this : " but the academic left has sold them on the idea that their marxist ideological apparatus was the one that would solve their issues."

So you are saying the academic left are Marxists ? In fact, step back. Are you suggesting Academia is left ? And the whole paragraph is saying that Marxist academics are selling the working class an idea ?

Where is this happening ?

Marxists are pretty rare in UK politics. And I have never heard of Marxist academics knocking on doors or going into pubs, trying to sell working folk Marxist ideas.

So you have just swapped morals for virtue ?

I am not trying to nit pick here, I just wish people would speak plain language and say what they mean instead of using wide open terms.

Quote :" Once disagreement is considered evidence of bad character rather than a difference of opinion, debate collapses into labelling and contempt."

But that must depend on the disagreement surely? And this is exactly my point of not using sweeping terms and people not being willing to be tied down to specific words that have specific meanings.

If I say " I do not like that race of people", is that an indicator of good character or bad character ? And if people do not say that, but instead heavily suggest it, where does that put them on the 1-10 scale of good to bad ?

But if I say " I think tax should be lower", how is that an indicator of good or bad character ?