FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Culture wars & wedge issues
Culture wars & wedge issues
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
More and more, it feels like culture wars & wedge issues are prominent in politics.
Are they a consequence of modern media & social media?
Are they here to stay?
Or were wedge issues & culture wars always front & centre with politics? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don't know if they've always been front and centre but just about every single one of us is part of the problem.
Some hate the poor 'getting handouts'. Some hate the rich 'avoiding tax' etc etc."
I honestly don't know if culture wars & wedge issues have always been such a thing either. They feel more ubiquitous now. But that may just because of rolling news & social media always being there now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know if they've always been front and centre but just about every single one of us is part of the problem.
Some hate the poor 'getting handouts'. Some hate the rich 'avoiding tax' etc etc.
I honestly don't know if culture wars & wedge issues have always been such a thing either. They feel more ubiquitous now. But that may just because of rolling news & social media always being there now."
I'd probably agree that rolling news and social media make it certainly appear more prevalent these days. But I can't compare it to yesteryear. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read."
Algorithmic rabbit hole? FFS you continue to talk a lot of nonsense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read."
I don't agree that we 'have to pick a side'
As I said already, we are all partly to blame with the way we 'debate each other' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
Algorithmic rabbit hole? FFS you continue to talk a lot of nonsense. "
...or you don't understand what it means.
What do you think it means? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
Algorithmic rabbit hole? FFS you continue to talk a lot of nonsense. "
He's right on that part. The way algorithms work is in simple terms:
You view something online, spend a certain amount of time viewing it. The algorithms will pick this up, think its of interest to you and show you more of the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
I don't agree that we 'have to pick a side'
As I said already, we are all partly to blame with the way we 'debate each other'"
We don't, actually, have to. There is now a sense that you have to.
Everything is now a referendum on something or other. It's crept into the national psyche having been forced to make an important decision once based on inadequate or confusing or too complex information it's easier to do it again and again.
COVID masks and vaccines too.
Pick a side. Fight to the death. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
I don't agree that we 'have to pick a side'
As I said already, we are all partly to blame with the way we 'debate each other'
We don't, actually, have to. There is now a sense that you have to.
Everything is now a referendum on something or other. It's crept into the national psyche having been forced to make an important decision once based on inadequate or confusing or too complex information it's easier to do it again and again.
COVID masks and vaccines too.
Pick a side. Fight to the death."
Maybe you're right that there is a sense that we have to. If that's what we're being sold, I'm not buying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
I don't agree that we 'have to pick a side'
As I said already, we are all partly to blame with the way we 'debate each other'"
People will assume you have a side regardless if you've picked one or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
I don't agree that we 'have to pick a side'
As I said already, we are all partly to blame with the way we 'debate each other'
People will assume you have a side regardless if you've picked one or not."
Very true. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know if they've always been front and centre but just about every single one of us is part of the problem.
Some hate the poor 'getting handouts'. Some hate the rich 'avoiding tax' etc etc."
Totally agree the rich need to pay up, But we are all greedy.
The poor need to pull there waight and work leaving more for the sick PIP and in work top up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
Algorithmic rabbit hole? FFS you continue to talk a lot of nonsense. "
The only rabbit hols I have have rabbits in them, but they doo make good eating |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"More and more, it feels like culture wars & wedge issues are prominent in politics.
Are they a consequence of modern media & social media?
Are they here to stay?
Or were wedge issues & culture wars always front & centre with politics?"
It’s the only thing left that the Conservatives have to fight with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"You have to pick a side now. That was not necessarily the case before.
People also feel knowledgeable about a subject because of Google when previously they were more willing to say they didn't know.
Once you have, tentatively picked a side you are then down the algorithmic rabbit hole and directed further and further away from the centre unless you actively think about what you see or hear or read.
Algorithmic rabbit hole? FFS you continue to talk a lot of nonsense. "
In terms of social media platforms Easy is absolutely correct.
Every time you use one of these platforms you are tracked. You are also tracked when you leave and go to another. The type of content you read or spend more “dwell time” on teaches the platforms what they believe interests you most. The algorithms behind the scenes then determine what content to push/highlight to you going forward.
You are constantly being manipulated and corralled into echo chambers in and across all the different social media channels. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"More and more, it feels like culture wars & wedge issues are prominent in politics.
Are they a consequence of modern media & social media?
Are they here to stay?
Or were wedge issues & culture wars always front & centre with politics?
It’s the only thing left that the Conservatives have to fight with."
You've fallen right into the fire here.
You think it's only the Tories that do this?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times."
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times.
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for?"
You can have a mixture of left and right but you obviously hold strong opinions on specific subjects? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times."
interesting you pick an analogy that involves both a fight and also a clear victim and aggressor.
Imo we get to a side too quickly before spending time in the middle. We also don't spend any time understanding the other views in the room. We ask questions not go understand but to lead people to our thinking. And that's if we ask questions at all.
Thw world is complex. Often there's is no right or wormg, just least worse. And even that is subjective. We all measure success differently.
That's not being neutral or stuck on a fence. It's about embracing difficult questions with the repsect they deserve.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times.
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for?
You can have a mixture of left and right but you obviously hold strong opinions on specific subjects? "
Of course I do but I'm not picking a side. I will pick any side given they match my views.
I'm not gonna be held to 'I'm left or I'm right'
I mean I'm always right but not in that sense  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times.
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for?
You can have a mixture of left and right but you obviously hold strong opinions on specific subjects?
Of course I do but I'm not picking a side. I will pick any side given they match my views.
I'm not gonna be held to 'I'm left or I'm right'
I mean I'm always right but not in that sense "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times. interesting you pick an analogy that involves both a fight and also a clear victim and aggressor.
Imo we get to a side too quickly before spending time in the middle. We also don't spend any time understanding the other views in the room. We ask questions not go understand but to lead people to our thinking. And that's if we ask questions at all.
Thw world is complex. Often there's is no right or wormg, just least worse. And even that is subjective. We all measure success differently.
That's not being neutral or stuck on a fence. It's about embracing difficult questions with the repsect they deserve.
"
I have been railing against binary tribalist views ever since the Brexit referendum. For the UK, what happened in 2016 and the growth of social media has increasingly dumbed down debate over politics. It has been called the footballisation of politics. The notion that there are only two sides and one must lose for the other to win. Nuance and grey replaced by black & white definitive positions. We see it on here regularly with some posters.
There is a thing called compromise where all parties may come away with some benefits. Not all the benefits, but better than nothing! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I have been railing against binary tribalist views ever since the Brexit referendum. For the UK, what happened in 2016 and the growth of social media has increasingly dumbed down debate over politics. It has been called the footballisation of politics. The notion that there are only two sides and one must lose for the other to win. Nuance and grey replaced by black & white definitive positions. We see it on here regularly with some posters.
There is a thing called compromise where all parties may come away with some benefits. Not all the benefits, but better than nothing! "
You raise a valid point about the tribality of politics. Of course, tribality goes much deeper and more pervasively than just politics. It's endemic in all walks of life. We are a tribal species, so it should not amaze anyone that we function as such.
Of course there is always compromise if both sides have the will and the way to sit down and negotiate. It must be said though, a compromise is often a solution where neither side gets what they want.
Bob might want to go to a Steakhouse, Alice might want an Italian. But neither want to go to each other's restaurants, so they settle on a compromise and go for a Chinese. Neither are getting what they really wanted. Both are unhappy with a fall back choice. So you could argue, what's the point in even going ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"I have been railing against binary tribalist views ever since the Brexit referendum. For the UK, what happened in 2016 and the growth of social media has increasingly dumbed down debate over politics. It has been called the footballisation of politics. The notion that there are only two sides and one must lose for the other to win. Nuance and grey replaced by black & white definitive positions. We see it on here regularly with some posters.
There is a thing called compromise where all parties may come away with some benefits. Not all the benefits, but better than nothing!
You raise a valid point about the tribality of politics. Of course, tribality goes much deeper and more pervasively than just politics. It's endemic in all walks of life. We are a tribal species, so it should not amaze anyone that we function as such.
Of course there is always compromise if both sides have the will and the way to sit down and negotiate. It must be said though, a compromise is often a solution where neither side gets what they want.
Bob might want to go to a Steakhouse, Alice might want an Italian. But neither want to go to each other's restaurants, so they settle on a compromise and go for a Chinese. Neither are getting what they really wanted. Both are unhappy with a fall back choice. So you could argue, what's the point in even going ?
"
Because they still get to eat and spend some quality time together as opposed to doing nothing?
But yeah your points are good ones. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have been railing against binary tribalist views ever since the Brexit referendum. For the UK, what happened in 2016 and the growth of social media has increasingly dumbed down debate over politics. It has been called the footballisation of politics. The notion that there are only two sides and one must lose for the other to win. Nuance and grey replaced by black & white definitive positions. We see it on here regularly with some posters.
There is a thing called compromise where all parties may come away with some benefits. Not all the benefits, but better than nothing!
You raise a valid point about the tribality of politics. Of course, tribality goes much deeper and more pervasively than just politics. It's endemic in all walks of life. We are a tribal species, so it should not amaze anyone that we function as such.
Of course there is always compromise if both sides have the will and the way to sit down and negotiate. It must be said though, a compromise is often a solution where neither side gets what they want.
Bob might want to go to a Steakhouse, Alice might want an Italian. But neither want to go to each other's restaurants, so they settle on a compromise and go for a Chinese. Neither are getting what they really wanted. Both are unhappy with a fall back choice. So you could argue, what's the point in even going ?
"
they compromise by going to a pub that serves both steaks and Italian food. The quality may not be as good but they both get close to what they want. They should at least spend more time looking for alternatives that they are happier with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times."
Actually, this is not what I meant.
I was saying that you are pressured into taking a side when you shouldn't have to.
Brexit is a perfect example of this.
I would contend that the correct position for most people was "don't know" because quite frankly the information available was rubbish and the topic too complex. Most people did not give a crap about the question until asked to decide. However, they had to say yes or no and were then wedded to that answer whatever the consequences.
The middle ground doesn't have to sit around doing nothing. It can say this part works and that part doesn't and find out what might actually be acceptable to the majority. It is not inaction. That is actually what democracy is.
It is vanilla though. It is not the "strong leadership" that so many seem to crave that "gets things done" in an enduring way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times.
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for?
You can have a mixture of left and right but you obviously hold strong opinions on specific subjects?
Of course I do but I'm not picking a side. I will pick any side given they match my views.
I'm not gonna be held to 'I'm left or I'm right'
I mean I'm always right but not in that sense "
This is where we have this odd position where anybody who disagrees with this Government is labelled as "lefty" when what they may actually be disagreeing with is incompetence and lack of integrity i.e. crap government. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Easy is right in their observations, you do have to pick a side now whether you like it or not. "Sitting on the fence" about issues is NOT an option anymore. Why ? Well that's akin to seeing someone getting beaten up in the street and not offering to assist them. Inaction is not neutrality, it is essentially complicity, because you are aiding the oppressor.
I think a lot of people rather enjoyed the middle ground where they had no strong opinions on a particular subject, and felt they were able to see the nuances. However that "middle ground" is being squeezed thinner and thinner by the groundswell either side of the issue, until it will eventually evaporate. There will be no middle ground. It's a polarisation of politics.
Whether that is a good or a bad thing remains debatable. On the one hand, strong convictions lead to action and things get done. On the other hand, there is clearly a winner and a loser and no room for compromise, so it's a fight to the death every time isn't it ?
And the middle ground sits about doing nothing apart from telling everyone they can see the nuance.
Interesting times.
I obviously don't agree.
No one has to sit on a fence just as no one has to pick a side.
I want central ground. For me that is a mixture between left and right.
Which side do I pick to fight until the death for?
You can have a mixture of left and right but you obviously hold strong opinions on specific subjects?
Of course I do but I'm not picking a side. I will pick any side given they match my views.
I'm not gonna be held to 'I'm left or I'm right'
I mean I'm always right but not in that sense
This is where we have this odd position where anybody who disagrees with this Government is labelled as "lefty" when what they may actually be disagreeing with is incompetence and lack of integrity i.e. crap government."
Absolutely agree. It’s a bizarre mindset. Case in point is the ECHR...
“The idea for the creation of the ECHR arose in the 1940s during WWII to ensure that governments would never again be allowed to dehumanise and abuse people’s rights with impunity"
Guess what right wing folks...Churchill was an avid supporter of the creation of the ECHR and that is a quote from him.
So why not the British right-wing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Absolutely agree. It’s a bizarre mindset. Case in point is the ECHR...
“The idea for the creation of the ECHR arose in the 1940s during WWII to ensure that governments would never again be allowed to dehumanise and abuse people’s rights with impunity"
Guess what right wing folks...Churchill was an avid supporter of the creation of the ECHR and that is a quote from him.
So why not the British right-wing?"
Except you conveniently ignore that Churchill supported and even pioneered the idea of a "United States of Europe", yet he wanted the UK to only be an outside partner of it, not a member of it as equals to all other European nations.
That's no contradiction to the British Right-Wing, or of British political ideology in general which is very exceptionalist in nature, but displayed in different forms depending on right or left leaning politics. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. "
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged. "
Which is why I see political labelling as irrational and not reflective of reality. It's just an "othering" tactic to attempt at browbeating down anybody who dares to show independence in thought and not simply declare full blind loyalty to a side or cause. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"
Absolutely agree. It’s a bizarre mindset. Case in point is the ECHR...
“The idea for the creation of the ECHR arose in the 1940s during WWII to ensure that governments would never again be allowed to dehumanise and abuse people’s rights with impunity"
Guess what right wing folks...Churchill was an avid supporter of the creation of the ECHR and that is a quote from him.
So why not the British right-wing?
Except you conveniently ignore that Churchill supported and even pioneered the idea of a "United States of Europe", yet he wanted the UK to only be an outside partner of it, not a member of it as equals to all other European nations.
That's no contradiction to the British Right-Wing, or of British political ideology in general which is very exceptionalist in nature, but displayed in different forms depending on right or left leaning politics. "
It was but one example of where a divergence from the prevailing political narrative means you must be a “leftie”. Nobody could call Churchill a leftie with a straight face.
There are probably better examples, but the ECHR felt relevant lately. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Which is why I see political labelling as irrational and not reflective of reality. It's just an "othering" tactic to attempt at browbeating down anybody who dares to show independence in thought and not simply declare full blind loyalty to a side or cause. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. "
disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm. "
Well for what it's worth I wouldn't date or screw anybody who openly declares on their dating or hookup profiles that they won't date/fuck someone of a particular political leaning.
Like, what the fuck does my political beliefs have to do with my personality or skills in the sack? There's zero correlation, zero causation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm.
Well for what it's worth I wouldn't date or screw anybody who openly declares on their dating or hookup profiles that they won't date/fuck someone of a particular political leaning.
Like, what the fuck does my political beliefs have to do with my personality or skills in the sack? There's zero correlation, zero causation. "
It does say something about your personality.
Of course it does.
That doesn't mean judging people based on that one element alone is correct though.
Having said that, you are being just as perfunctory in saying that you wouldn't be interested in them, aren't you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm.
Well for what it's worth I wouldn't date or screw anybody who openly declares on their dating or hookup profiles that they won't date/fuck someone of a particular political leaning.
Like, what the fuck does my political beliefs have to do with my personality or skills in the sack? There's zero correlation, zero causation.
It does say something about your personality.
Of course it does.
That doesn't mean judging people based on that one element alone is correct though.
Having said that, you are being just as perfunctory in saying that you wouldn't be interested in them, aren't you?"
No, my lack of interest in such people is because I find them shallow and judgemental in their personality, not because they are of any particular political leaning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged. "
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm.
Well for what it's worth I wouldn't date or screw anybody who openly declares on their dating or hookup profiles that they won't date/fuck someone of a particular political leaning.
Like, what the fuck does my political beliefs have to do with my personality or skills in the sack? There's zero correlation, zero causation.
It does say something about your personality.
Of course it does.
That doesn't mean judging people based on that one element alone is correct though.
Having said that, you are being just as perfunctory in saying that you wouldn't be interested in them, aren't you?"
I would agree with him. Anyone who says the wouldn't date a leftie or Tory will be of zero interest to me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up. disagree. Plenty of people would "never date a Tory". That's picking a side and taking it to zealous levels. If you are painting one side as be doing "a bad thing" you may just be the other side of the same problem. "It's their fault that there's an us versus them issue". Hmmm.
Well for what it's worth I wouldn't date or screw anybody who openly declares on their dating or hookup profiles that they won't date/fuck someone of a particular political leaning.
Like, what the fuck does my political beliefs have to do with my personality or skills in the sack? There's zero correlation, zero causation. "
It does have a correlation. As an example people who think brexit is a good idea, aren't going to be a good match for me. And vice versa. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see."
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see.
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently."
Of course, I don't disagree. I would argue those others are in a minority though, certainly on these forums. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see."
Point of order their feisty... I don’t speak out against the Tories per se. I speak out against the last three Governments led by Johnson-Truss-Sunak.
I have on numerous occasions explicitly said I don’t really see them as Conservatives as it is clear the party was hijacked by the right wing ERG.
I have criticised Cameron, was indifferent to May, have criticised both Blair and Brown, actually thought Major was better than given credit for and criticised Thatcher. Before that, not old enough or wasn’t born  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see.
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently."
Posters who aren’t regulars have labelled me a leftie. One regular poster labelled me “the chairperson”. Another regular poster who is a man of few words (and even fewer useful contributions) labelled me a cunt.
I don’t care what people call me as long as they call me too late for dinner |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see.
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently.
Posters who aren’t regulars have labelled me a leftie. One regular poster labelled me “the chairperson”. Another regular poster who is a man of few words (and even fewer useful contributions) labelled me a cunt.
I don’t care what people call me as long as they call me too late for dinner "
I take your point. I was merely getting at the current 'Tories'. Let's face it that's what every profile which says 'I won't meet Tories' means.
I've been labelled as both left and right on here too. Maybe that's what happens when you're not entrenched either way |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see.
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently.
Posters who aren’t regulars have labelled me a leftie. One regular poster labelled me “the chairperson”. Another regular poster who is a man of few words (and even fewer useful contributions) labelled me a cunt.
I don’t care what people call me as long as they call me too late for dinner "
Same, although being called a cunt and a prick became tiresome so I took a break for a while.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Notice that this whole "pick a side" rhetoric always comes from those at the upper echelons of society yelling at the plebs down below to get off the fence and support the right cause?
It's not simply right or left, one side or the other side, because if you distill the essence of what ails the UK today it comes down to ONE thing: those on top vs those below.
And those on top are more than happy to keep the polarising culture/left v right wars going, because as long as everyone's fighting the ones beside them on the same level, they won't stop to look UP at who's actually lording it over them and keeping their boots firmly down on any challenge to their entrenched status, riches and power.
I hate being lazily generalised into being one side or the other. I value my own political opinions and views on societal issues to be independent of political loyalty to any particular party or political slant.
That is different from blind/bland sit-on-the-fence centrism which some have alluded to here as not having an opinion on anything (and hiding behind the excuse of "seeing nuance") so as to conveniently back the "winning side" when things clear up.
Speaking out against those at the top, who want to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, is labeled "lefty", "loony left", "socialist", "woke" etc etc.
While I agree with you. You will be planted squarely in the "far left" camp for even questioning the motives of those at the top.
I think most of us don't see ourselves on one side or the other. But it is how were are all judged.
Can't agree with this. People are labelled because ether can't look at 2 sides of a coin.
There's of a few on here I'd label on both ends of the scale but there's plenty I wouldn't.
Take both Jackal & Birldn, they both regularly speak out against the Tories yet I see them both as centrists. I could be wrong but that's what I see.
Possibly you see that. But others label them differently.
Posters who aren’t regulars have labelled me a leftie. One regular poster labelled me “the chairperson”. Another regular poster who is a man of few words (and even fewer useful contributions) labelled me a cunt.
I don’t care what people call me as long as they call me too late for dinner
I take your point. I was merely getting at the current 'Tories'. Let's face it that's what every profile which says 'I won't meet Tories' means.
I've been labelled as both left and right on here too. Maybe that's what happens when you're not entrenched either way "
lol it's like if you vote for a certain politician you are ostracized. I vote both democrat and republican last election. Yet people remember just the presidential election . Not the ones that make the policies in the first place. We all have different views. The last Senate race I voted for OZ because fetterman had a stroke. I thought can I trust him being a pilot with 150 souls on board. No I couldn't. Then the governor race I chose Shapiro a democrat. Marciano was too extreme. Yet I get labeled a right wing fascist. No one takes into account the policies of the ones that actually set the precedent. It's always the presidential race that matters. When in all reality it's the others that matter most. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To be honest I read these forums and respond. Because a lot of people here want to follow the European model of politics. I do not like it. But we headed in that direction. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some."
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My house is always open as it should be. The internet is a blessing and a curse. I want to look into your eyes and your mannerisms before I can truly judge someone. Anyone can bang on a keyboard and get frustrated.including myself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. "
isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Let me ask this what is your goal in life? You going to care for someone 3000 miles away or being more direct to your family friends and direct community. Nothing else takes precedence in my mind besides those 3. I can vote for the better yet it always falls on the magical 3. Constantly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way."
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. "
Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I just looking at the downfall of a once great nation. The " Crack on " attitude went out the window. It's is what can the government do for me attitude. It's truly sad.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!! "
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Someone tell me I am wrong. The reliance on government is your mantra. Power to the people. Oh wait there is Brexit.i am going complain about tomatoes and cucumbers. Yup it's Brexit fault. It's freaking silly to me. Grow your own shit. Just saying it's not the end of the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. "
welcome to reality. Do you think anyone in Ukraine is thinking of someone 200 miles away. No the are tending to thier immediate needs. As a whole they fighting for their existinance. Yet personally they need to survive too. Sacrificing one for the other. It's not that hard of a concept. Your government needs do not override the needs of your current necessities. You going to give a your last potatoes that can feed you and your family to the government? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. "
try being a self reliant individual |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. welcome to reality. Do you think anyone in Ukraine is thinking of someone 200 miles away. No the are tending to thier immediate needs. As a whole they fighting for their existinance. Yet personally they need to survive too. Sacrificing one for the other. It's not that hard of a concept. Your government needs do not override the needs of your current necessities. You going to give a your last potatoes that can feed you and your family to the government? "
Yes, Ukrainians seem to care so much about the wellbeing of their fellow citizens well over 200 miles away that they're prepared to fight and do anything they can for eachother.
I think you picked a bad example there.
Not sure what you are talking about me giving potatoes to the government for. Completely lost me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's frightening to say. .. no one learned by from the pandemic at all.Tbe reliance on government intervention was appalling in my eyes. Just a thought. I fed and my husband too multiple families thu hunting fishing and gardening. Yet those basic principles are viewed as appalling. The supermarkets are bare blame Brexit. My mind goes to wtf . Maybe I am wrong and I should trust elected officials. I digress fuck them I will plan accordingly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. welcome to reality. Do you think anyone in Ukraine is thinking of someone 200 miles away. No the are tending to thier immediate needs. As a whole they fighting for their existinance. Yet personally they need to survive too. Sacrificing one for the other. It's not that hard of a concept. Your government needs do not override the needs of your current necessities. You going to give a your last potatoes that can feed you and your family to the government?
Yes, Ukrainians seem to care so much about the wellbeing of their fellow citizens well over 200 miles away that they're prepared to fight and do anything they can for eachother.
I think you picked a bad example there.
Not sure what you are talking about me giving potatoes to the government for. Completely lost me. "
ok can you survive without government intervention? I can . It was not a bad example. Can you truly do it? I can... The pandemic showed me 1 thing.. people can be desperate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. welcome to reality. Do you think anyone in Ukraine is thinking of someone 200 miles away. No the are tending to thier immediate needs. As a whole they fighting for their existinance. Yet personally they need to survive too. Sacrificing one for the other. It's not that hard of a concept. Your government needs do not override the needs of your current necessities. You going to give a your last potatoes that can feed you and your family to the government?
Yes, Ukrainians seem to care so much about the wellbeing of their fellow citizens well over 200 miles away that they're prepared to fight and do anything they can for eachother.
I think you picked a bad example there.
Not sure what you are talking about me giving potatoes to the government for. Completely lost me. ok can you survive without government intervention? I can . It was not a bad example. Can you truly do it? I can... The pandemic showed me 1 thing.. people can be desperate."
I hunt my husband does too guess who got called upon when factories got shut down.. yet we are the villains. As OP said. Media and social media is a factor to public acceptance. My bitch ass says Fuck you all unless you sit at my table. You inconsiquential until then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't have the empathy for everyone. I just concentrate on family and friends. It might be my downfall to some.
I don't think it's a downfall.
I just want to understand how that lines up with being patriotic. It seems contradictory. isn't that a culture issue? Our number one trusted institution is the military. Not government not healthcare. We are raised as warriors. I said we need to have a isolationist policy. Some here lost their minds. Yet Brexit well is a isolationist policy. We get condemned for thinking the same way.
No one trusts the government here. Well, some do. But not generally.
But I meant more how you love your country (patriotism), but don't care about your fellow citizens. That's what feels like a contradiction. Have you been here? If you haven't no matter where you go there is always a American flag in full view. We cherish our individuality the frontier you on your own mentality. But stand for the flag which is our beginning as a nation. We are one of the youngest nations yet hold one of the most powers on the planet. Do you want us to stop and say fuck everyone else except trade? Historically you idiots in Europe have a much more penchant for wars. Compared to us. Yet we are the villains. Damn yanks !!!
I've been many times. Met lots of interesting people with different perspectives.
As I said, I don't understand the contradiction between loving your country, but not caring about the wellbeing of your fellow citizens. It's a mystery to me. welcome to reality. Do you think anyone in Ukraine is thinking of someone 200 miles away. No the are tending to thier immediate needs. As a whole they fighting for their existinance. Yet personally they need to survive too. Sacrificing one for the other. It's not that hard of a concept. Your government needs do not override the needs of your current necessities. You going to give a your last potatoes that can feed you and your family to the government?
Yes, Ukrainians seem to care so much about the wellbeing of their fellow citizens well over 200 miles away that they're prepared to fight and do anything they can for eachother.
I think you picked a bad example there.
Not sure what you are talking about me giving potatoes to the government for. Completely lost me. "
Why do you you hide your profile johnny just like the others? I will rock my truth's why can't you ? You want me to accept your analogies just like others. Yet you not accepting yourself in the the first place. How am I am I supposed to believe? I'll will post a pic of UK on a piece of paper across my my vagina if you reciprocate.its a simple understanding on who is real and who just talks shit. I am game are you? Proof everyone wants facts. It's not that hard. I am me are you? It's only fair in a public discussion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's the same that goes for anyone self worth matters to me you want be to express opinion that others you try and want to accept. A picture states a wonderful thousand words. Otherwise in my minds eye you just a insignificant troll. Trying to project your own ineptitude. Social media is a bitch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Step up. Be socially acceptable. It's not that hard. name the game I am in. otherwise in my views. You just a talking mouthpiece. No substance just disdain |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm not quite sure what's going on above my post.
In times of national disaster, both the UK and American government have agencies which mobilise to assist affected areas.
Food, medical supplies, etc etc.
I think Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans was a good example your side. National agencies stepped in, and did their job.
The same happens here too.
I'm not sure we are any different Blu.
And I think you'd find the same in pretty much any developed European nation too. Governments doing that governing thing, with multi-agency response and numerous NGO's and Charities filling in the gaps where needed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
