Was there at least some implicit racism in all that posturing?
To understand the left's critique you have to factor in their driving force - utter and complete hatred of middle England, and the wish to destroy it completely.
Any regime, force, or movement that tilts against the English middle class is by default ok with the left - no matter what its crimes at home or elsewhere.
That's why radical islam is OK, that's why the IRA was OK, that's why Chavez is OK, that's why stalinism is OK, that's why Cuba is OK.
Racist SA should have realised that it merely needed to start planting a few bombs in the shires in order to get the left off its back.
After reading of the unfunny joke fellow being arrested I fear for his non-blog about Mandela Mr. T might've been tried in a secret court and presently be languishing for an indeterminate period in a jail cell in an unspecified location.
Hmm. I did mean this to be amusing, but it's probably not far enough away from reality. That's a bit depressing.
He tweeted about 20 hours ago from the St Pancras Renaissance hotel:
Would you feel the same way if SA had been a black minority regime denying the right to vote to a white majority?
Yes. I would still have found them morally repugnant and frankly irrational but by no means the worst on this benighted planet of ours. Murdering governments are 10 a penny and Mandala was fortunate in his opponent.
Of course there were episodes of unjustifiable and inexcusable violence and brutality by SA police, I don't dispute that for a second. But the regime were not systematic murderers or torturers. Mandala himself was living proof of that.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
Was there at least some implicit racism in all that posturing?
To understand the left's critique you have to factor in their driving force - utter and complete hatred of middle England, and the wish to destroy it completely.
Any regime, force, or movement that tilts against the English middle class is by default ok with the left - no matter what its crimes at home or elsewhere.
That's why radical islam is OK, that's why the IRA was OK, that's why Chavez is OK, that's why stalinism is OK, that's why Cuba is OK.
Racist SA should have realised that it merely needed to start planting a few bombs in the shires in order to get the left off its back.
Would you feel the same way if SA had been a black minority regime denying the right to vote to a white majority?
Life for the majority of black Africans in South Africa under apartheid was probably far better than it was in most other African countries, but we mustn't say this because we might get lynched.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Completely agree Jack. Most of the regimes I mentioned in my original post were probably rightest in nature although many claimed to be socialist.
The correct figure for 2010 Lib Dems as per Table 2 is
Lab 29% LD 30% Con 8% UKIP 4% SNP 1% Green 6% Others 1% DK/WNV 21%
Are you happy that your party are retaining just 30% of the people who voted for it in 2010 Mark?
(By the way, your figures are no more "correct" or "incorrect" than my figures. You are just reporting different parameters.)
No , of course I am not happy with retaining just 30% of 2010 Lib Dem voters , nor was I happy in early 2009 when ICM polls were showing us retaining only 50 to 55% of 2005 Lib Dem voters but things did change .
So, you are predicting Cleggasm II ? The Return of the Cleggasm ? Multiple Cleggasms ?
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
Oh for gawd sake Patrick.
I ate a mars bar over the weekend. I doubt it was exported from the fourth planet from the sun which in turn doesn't publish a page 3 on it's mighty warm surface !!
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
And racism is not the preserve of white minorities over black majorities. The Rwandan genocide was fuelled out of ethnic hatred, Mugabe's thugs in Zimbabwe made life hell for, and murdered white farmers (The ethnic minority) and the conflict in Sri Lanka was an underlying Tamil-Sinhalese one. Of course evil is not just about racism, Pol Pot & Chairman Mao murdered people just because they were a lawyer, doctor or teacher for a warped political ideology which is every bit as bad.
As JackW says evil is not within the political spectrum.
Life for the majority of black Africans in South Africa under apartheid was probably far better than it was in most other African countries, but we mustn't say this because we might get lynched.
No-one will lynch you, but you may be accused of seeking to justify apartheid.
''Would you feel the same way if SA had been a black minority regime denying the right to vote to a white majority?
I didn't 'feel' any way, and I still don't. ''
I am just trying to explain why the left's critique of obnoxious regimes in the 1960s/1970s and 1980s wasn't consistent.
The left's critique of the communist east at that time was non-existent, despite a torrent of human rights abuses, and yet they threw everything at SA.
What's the reason for that? Soviet Russia was a bastion against middle class England (and America) and so all was forgiven.
Was there at least some implicit racism in all that posturing?
To understand the left's critique you have to factor in their driving force - utter and complete hatred of middle England, and the wish to destroy it completely.
Any regime, force, or movement that tilts against the English middle class is by default ok with the left - no matter what its crimes at home or elsewhere.
That's why radical islam is OK, that's why the IRA was OK, that's why Chavez is OK, that's why stalinism is OK, that's why Cuba is OK.
Racist SA should have realised that it merely needed to start planting a few bombs in the shires in order to get the left off its back.
Perhaps, if by 'left' you mean the Revolutionary Communist Party? Though to be fair to the RCP, I don't think they were that keen on Stalin.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
And Kim Jong-un is the president of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
You mean they were Liberal Democrats ???????!!!!!!!!
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
Was wondering where the name rang a bell - then i remembered , it is the watering hole for Manchester University
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
You mean they were Liberal Democrats ???????!!!!!!!!
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
Was wondering where the name rang a bell - then i remembered , it is the watering hole for Manchester University
Actually if you look at Mugabe, he is very careful to rail against white middle class 'colonial' Britain as much as he can. It's strange given most people in his country have never met,or seen Englishmen, and probably have zero idea of what he's talking about.
So why does Bob do it? easy. The British left will think a man who hates middle class white Englishmen with a vengeance can't be all bad.
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
There is something weird in you seeking to imply that I am somehow an apologist for Amin, Mao and Stalin because I dare to disagree with you about the degree to which the rule of law was applied in apartheid South Africa. Very, very weird.
Actually if you look at Mugabe, he is very careful to rail against white middle class 'colonial' Britain as much as he can. It's strange given most people in his country have never met,or Englishmen, and never will.
So why does he do it? easy. The British left will think a man who hates middle class white Englishmen with a vengeance can't be all bad.
Sounds like a curry loving leader a bit closer to home..
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
You mean they were Liberal Democrats ???????!!!!!!!!
If only they had been available to go into coalition with him and restrain all those slightly undesirable aspects of his policy. Things would have been so much better.
Actually if you look at Mugabe, he is very careful to rail against white middle class 'colonial' Britain as much as he can. It's strange given most people in his country have never met,or seen Englishmen, and probably have zero idea of what he's talking about.
So why does Bob do it? easy. The British left will think a man who hates middle class white Englishmen with a vengeance can't be all bad.
I think if you compare life expectancy of black South Africans under apartheid to life expectancy of black Africans in other African countries, the South African figures would come out very favourably. But presumably some would argue that it was better to die at the age of 25 in a theoretically free country like Congo or Guinea.
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
The latest Guardian/ICM poll shows the Conservatives closing the gap on Labour to just five percentage points. The Tories are on 32% – an advance of two points from November. Labour falls back one point to 37%, and the Liberal Democrats also sink by a point, to stand at 12%. Ukip is on 9%.
Most Britons have felt no benefits from economic recovery, opinion poll finds Tories close gap on Labour by two points, despite 70% of voters polled by ICM/Guardian saying they have not seen any gains
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
There is something weird in you seeking to imply that I am somehow an apologist for Amin, Mao and Stalin because I dare to disagree with you about the degree to which the rule of law was applied in apartheid South Africa. Very, very weird.
I seriously wasn't SO. Apologies if you took it that way.
I think if you compare life expectancy of black South Africans under apartheid to life expectancy of black Africans in other African countries, the South African figures would come out very favourably. But presumably some would argue that it was better to die at the age of 25 in a theoretically free country like Congo or Guinea.
With the recovery appearing to gather pace, David Cameron and Osborne retain their solid lead over Ed Miliband and the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, as the team most trusted to manage the economy properly, with 39% backing the Tory pair to handle the economy, compared with just 23% who side with Labour's two Eds.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
In addition to the above, they suppressed the trade unions, and gave employers almost unfettered powers over their workforces. They were fervently anti-communist, and reinstated capital punishment. They sent the "asocial" to concentration camps. These would all have been considered right wing policies at the time.
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
The most obvious reason for Mandela not having suffered the fate of Steve Biko is that his case became an international cause-celebre. So, in short the Anti-Apartheid movement can justly claim credit for having saved his life.
The latest Guardian/ICM poll shows the Conservatives closing the gap on Labour to just five percentage points. The Tories are on 32% – an advance of two points from November. Labour falls back one point to 37%, and the Liberal Democrats also sink by a point, to stand at 12%. Ukip is on 9%.
Most Britons have felt no benefits from economic recovery, opinion poll finds Tories close gap on Labour by two points, despite 70% of voters polled by ICM/Guardian saying they have not seen any gains
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
In addition to the above, they suppressed the trade unions, and gave employers almost unfettered powers over their workforces. They were fervently anti-communist, and reinstated capital punishment. They sent the "asocial" to concentration camps. These would all have been considered right wing policies at the time.
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
They also oversaw the privatisation of many banks and businesses:
Where is the aspiration, where is the vision, where is the future in bloody cakes? Nothing like supporting new adaptive manufacturing techniques or 3D printing. Is this really the best example Labour can use.
Remember when Maggie said he was a man "we can do business with"?
You have a point, but its not like SA was last man standing in the obnoxious regime stakes. And yet for the left the nasty SA regime was the only nasty man ever in the game.
I think this is what genuinely shocked Maggie when she defied all those calls to stop trading with SA.
Maggie realised that, as far as the left and obnoxious regimes were concerned, SA was the only game in town.
And the reason is that all the others were ranged against middle Britain.
"The poll also asked voters whether they were worried that the emerging recovery was based on an unsustainable new property boom. Overall, voters dismissed this concern – which has been raised by the business secretary, Vince Cable, among others – by 49% to 34%. Even in the south, where housing is so costly, 45% disagree with the suggestion that growth is fuelled by a property bubble, and only 35% agree."
@DavidL - there was a degree of rule of law in South Africa, but plenty of people disappeared and/or were killed without due process; while plenty of killers went unpunished despite the evidence compiled against them.
Plenty? Some certainly. Steve Biko was probably one. And it was so notable that many songs were written about it. Can you name any of the victims of Stalin (apart from Trotsky) or Castro or Amin or Mao?
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
There is something weird in you seeking to imply that I am somehow an apologist for Amin, Mao and Stalin because I dare to disagree with you about the degree to which the rule of law was applied in apartheid South Africa. Very, very weird.
I seriously wasn't SO. Apologies if you took it that way.
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
In addition to the above, they suppressed the trade unions, and gave employers almost unfettered powers over their workforces. They were fervently anti-communist, and reinstated capital punishment. They sent the "asocial" to concentration camps. These would all have been considered right wing policies at the time.
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
Didn't that Hitler fellow have the odd rumble with the German communists in the 1930's and have an almighty punch-up with Stalin from 1941 onward ?!?
Where is the aspiration, where is the vision, where is the future in bloody cakes? Nothing like supporting new adaptive manufacturing techniques or 3D printing. Is this really the best example Labour can use.
I actually have a weakness for cakes. And it is a big step up on whelks. First sign of progress in Labour for, well, several decades really.
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
In addition to the above, they suppressed the trade unions, and gave employers almost unfettered powers over their workforces. They were fervently anti-communist, and reinstated capital punishment. They sent the "asocial" to concentration camps. These would all have been considered right wing policies at the time.
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
Didn't that Hitler fellow have the odd rumble with the German communists in the 1930's and have an almighty punch-up with Stalin from 1941 onward ?!?
Remember when Maggie said he was a man "we can do business with"?
You have a point, but its not like SA was last man standing in the obnoxious regime stakes. And yet for the left the nasty SA regime was the only nasty man ever in the game.
I think this is what genuinely shocked Maggie when she defied all those calls to stop trading with SA.
Maggie realised that, as far as the left and obnoxious regimes were concerned, SA was the only game in town.
And the reason is that all the others were ranged against middle Britain.
How do you define "middle Britain" and the "left"?
The reason SA came for so much more mudslinging than all the other horrors is that racism is the worst crime bar none in the lefty pantheon. Kill a few million in the name of Marx and that's collateral damage. But racism - that's really bad. Objectively of course apartheid SA wasn't even near the front of the queue of 20th century evil regimes.
For "lefty" read righty, for "kill a few million in the name of Marx" read kill millions in the name of Hitler.
Evil is not the preserve of either extreme of the political spectrum.
Err...at the risk of invoking Godwin's law I'd respectfully point out that Hitler was a socialist. A National Socialist. He was, if I recall correctly, the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP, better known to us all as the Nazis).
SINO = Socialist in name only?
Old 'dolf was as lefty as they come :
Nationalising key industries High levels of state controlled employment rules State intervening in healthcare and education State controlling the media Trade tariffs to protect German workers Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
The Nazis don't really fit neatly into any left/right category. They took policies and ideas from both ends of the political spectrum.
What marvellous free market policies did he have then ? None. So not right wing in any way shape or form.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
In addition to the above, they suppressed the trade unions, and gave employers almost unfettered powers over their workforces. They were fervently anti-communist, and reinstated capital punishment. They sent the "asocial" to concentration camps. These would all have been considered right wing policies at the time.
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
Didn't that Hitler fellow have the odd rumble with the German communists in the 1930's and have an almighty punch-up with Stalin from 1941 onward ?!?
They sought to turn aggression outwards, through conquest. All Germans (other than Jews and other enemies of the regime) were to be rewarded at the expense of non-Germans.
Ahhh. Hitler was a lefty, apartheid wasn't THAT bad, and of course the left support Islamic terrorism.
It's Readings From The Big Book of Cliched Rightwing Stupidity hour on PB.
It wasn't as bad as the sustained program of torture and murder of poor south African blacks carried out by the Mandela family. I can't trace any pro-necklacing speeches by Mrs de Klerk. Do you know of any?
How do you define "middle Britain" and the "left"?
Well you have a point and these are vague terms it would probably take a book (or at least a PhD) to really say who the 'the left' and who is 'middle Britain' (or who was at the time).
DavidL made the point that the Labour party critique of obnoxious regimes in the 60s, 70s and 80s was relative. I was just trying to offer an explanation as to why it was relative.
The latest Guardian/ICM poll shows the Conservatives closing the gap on Labour to just five percentage points. The Tories are on 32% – an advance of two points from November. Labour falls back one point to 37%, and the Liberal Democrats also sink by a point, to stand at 12%. Ukip is on 9%.
Most Britons have felt no benefits from economic recovery, opinion poll finds Tories close gap on Labour by two points, despite 70% of voters polled by ICM/Guardian saying they have not seen any gains
Comments
To understand the left's critique you have to factor in their driving force - utter and complete hatred of middle England, and the wish to destroy it completely.
Any regime, force, or movement that tilts against the English middle class is by default ok with the left - no matter what its crimes at home or elsewhere.
That's why radical islam is OK, that's why the IRA was OK, that's why Chavez is OK, that's why stalinism is OK, that's why Cuba is OK.
Racist SA should have realised that it merely needed to start planting a few bombs in the shires in order to get the left off its back.
"Bloody best Christmas supermarket offer I've heard of !!"
Standard and Poor's seem to think so?
https://twitter.com/thomasknox
Of course there were episodes of unjustifiable and inexcusable violence and brutality by SA police, I don't dispute that for a second. But the regime were not systematic murderers or torturers. Mandala himself was living proof of that.
How about,.......
"The extreme of the political spectrum is the preserve of evil"?
Sounds like no change..
I ate a mars bar over the weekend. I doubt it was exported from the fourth planet from the sun which in turn doesn't publish a page 3 on it's mighty warm surface !!
Of course evil is not just about racism, Pol Pot & Chairman Mao murdered people just because they were a lawyer, doctor or teacher for a warped political ideology which is every bit as bad.
As JackW says evil is not within the political spectrum.
I didn't 'feel' any way, and I still don't. ''
I am just trying to explain why the left's critique of obnoxious regimes in the 1960s/1970s and 1980s wasn't consistent.
The left's critique of the communist east at that time was non-existent, despite a torrent of human rights abuses, and yet they threw everything at SA.
What's the reason for that? Soviet Russia was a bastion against middle class England (and America) and so all was forgiven.
Nationalising key industries
High levels of state controlled employment rules
State intervening in healthcare and education
State controlling the media
Trade tariffs to protect German workers
Running up huge national debts
Virtually a Labour party manifesto.
Sadly the best we might say is that evil is largely held at bay by the greatness of liberty, freedom and democracy but not always so.
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, even when Kinnock was trying to rid labour of militant, there was never a peep against the communist east.
And yet if I'm correct there was a 24 hour left dominated protest outside the SA embassy.
What's the reason for the discrepancy in the energy of the critique of these obnoxious regimes?
OK so a holiday would probably be a bit more expensive after the pound collapsed 50%, but it would be great news for me
There is something weird about the moral relativism of all this.
He was economically and ideologically to the left with a dose of non aligned anti semitism and warmongering on top.
"What's the reason for the discrepancy in the energy of the critique of these obnoxious regime"
Several hundred tonnes of liquid sunshine? Buys you a lot of tolerance from all parties
So why does Bob do it? easy. The British left will think a man who hates middle class white Englishmen with a vengeance can't be all bad.
http://tinyurl.com/lcd39es
Most Britons have felt no benefits from economic recovery, opinion poll finds
Tories close gap on Labour by two points, despite 70% of voters polled by ICM/Guardian saying they have not seen any gains
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/09/no-gains-economic-recovery-tories-cut-labour-lead-icm-guardian-poll
http://westberkslibdems.org.uk/en/article/2013/751155/liberal-democrats-select-their-prospective-parliamentary-candidate-for-wokingham?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Con 32 (+2)
Lab 37 (-1)
LD 12 (-1)
UKIP 9 (-1)
Their hostility towards the Catholic Church aligns them with much of the European left at the time. Their enthusiasm for eugenics could be found on both right and left at the time.
Progressives 49%
Assorted fruitcakes/loonies 41%
As dear old Benito allegedly said, "It is better to live one day as a lion and die than to live a thousand as a goat"
http://www.ub.edu/graap/EHR.pdf
Populus
YouGov
All MOE
Nothing happening out there. Nada.
http://www.labour.org.uk/today-the-whole-country-stands-with-small-businesses-like-mine
Where is the aspiration, where is the vision, where is the future in bloody cakes? Nothing like supporting new adaptive manufacturing techniques or 3D printing. Is this really the best example Labour can use.
It's Readings From The Big Book of Cliched Rightwing Stupidity hour on PB.
You have a point, but its not like SA was last man standing in the obnoxious regime stakes. And yet for the left the nasty SA regime was the only nasty man ever in the game.
I think this is what genuinely shocked Maggie when she defied all those calls to stop trading with SA.
Maggie realised that, as far as the left and obnoxious regimes were concerned, SA was the only game in town.
And the reason is that all the others were ranged against middle Britain.
"The poll also asked voters whether they were worried that the emerging recovery was based on an unsustainable new property boom. Overall, voters dismissed this concern – which has been raised by the business secretary, Vince Cable, among others – by 49% to 34%. Even in the south, where housing is so costly, 45% disagree with the suggestion that growth is fuelled by a property bubble, and only 35% agree."
"Better to die on our feet than live on our knees!"
Hitler was a leftie.
Only from the PB Tories.
Only on PB.
I would go with "A thousand days as a lion,and then the goat dies" personally.
I rather die on my feet than live upon my knees.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Emiliano_Zapata
Didn't Mel squeeze that in somewhere in Braveheart?
http://bit.ly/1cwqIqH
Well you have a point and these are vague terms it would probably take a book (or at least a PhD) to really say who the 'the left' and who is 'middle Britain' (or who was at the time).
DavidL made the point that the Labour party critique of obnoxious regimes in the 60s, 70s and 80s was relative. I was just trying to offer an explanation as to why it was relative.
Progressives (Con + LD) = 44%
Assorted fruitcakes/loonies 46%
It seems the new thread is still in cyberspace. Even accessing via the December Archive (to the right of screen) does not track it down.