bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
at least its all a shock and nobody with your experience - or people who could read - warned of this
Alexandole Boris de Pfeffel Johnson
- Thread starter hilts
- Start date
at least its all a shock and nobody with your experience - or people who could read - warned of this
The perfect fumble
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 24,464
Be under no illusion, Gove has fucked up and Johnson has just fired him, but that's not how it's being spun.
As a nation and as a people we get the government we deserve.
Last edited:
I have never heard anyone but you say "I'm a social conservative" so whatever you think it is, I don't know how you think it's "gaining traction" (whatever that means) among "the working classes" (whatever that means).
The perfect fumble
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 24,464
Probably the most ignorant thing I’ve read in a while, in this sub forum and that’s some going.
What are you expecting, people to walk around with badges on?
I know the left, in areas, loves to engage in identity politics and to label people but in reality there is a lot of nuance across the political spectrum. Many people will have some of these views without knowing what the wider ideological definition is.
It doesn’t surprise me you don’t know, many on the left are absolutely blindsided to how they’ve lost so much ground in the UK political debate.
Social conservatism vs the economic is the same as social liberalism vs the economic. People aren’t likely to go around calling themselves a “social liberal” either but it’s incredibly prominent in the UK, in fact you have those views, even if you don’t realise it. Social conservatism is a particular of values and some of them are now more popular in traditional working class areas.
Lisa Nandy said recently Labour was traditionally social conservative and that’s why they’ve lost working class areas. Starmer wants Labour to be the a party of patriotism again. So the party you’re more likely to vote for, agrees with me.
Our dear friend Urban Genie described it traditionally as Unionism, Anglicanism, the Monarchy, a view of the importance of the family unit, tight immigration controls, a need for the preservation of British culture and institutions and patriotism.
Now, I don’t think all of those things fit the bill, generally speaking, of where the traditional working class areas are going but some of them definitely do and it’s why Labour and people like you are so out of touch.
Oh and for a left wing atheist, @The perfect fumble to say people with social conservative values display the opposite of forgiveness, just proves how ignorant some people are and for the man who said “scabs” deserve violence to like it, shows a deep lack of self-awareness.
Last edited:
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 32,618
Social conservatism is a regression to a time where people knew their place, work hard to live, married and had kids, kept within their communities.
Most social conservatives oppose homosexuality, intergration, multiculturism, seculism, living out of wedlock, one parent families etc.
It is very popular amongst the more puritan born again and evangelical christian groups.
No suprise it is mostly seen in the US
This is why they try and equate the working class as social conservative, they are looking at it from an american viewpoint, while in the UK many working class will the economicaly conservative, socially we are a much more liberal tollerant bunch, that go strongly against the beliefs of social conservatives.
Plus the working classes pride in being Briitish and a lot them having high regards for the queen is not a factor of socual conservatism though some try to link it.
Though they deny this and claim to be enlightened they are not.
Last edited:
More ignorance.
You described it far better the last time you had a go.
There’s a desperation to equate evangelical Bible Belt right wingers in the US to British conservatives and British Christians and the reason being is to try and paint us in a particular light to win the argument.
It’s not “regressive” to want to hold off on progressing in all areas, regressing is the want to take us backwards and that’s not what the British conservative movement wants nor pushes for.
What you deem as progressive may be considered immoral by others, myself included and you don’t have a monopoly on objective morality, in fact nobody does really, when it comes to politics.
I would actually argue and you can see it in your posts, that social liberals have ironically become the most intolerant bunch of people in the country, who occupy a wide enough base, outside of the extreme fringes.
Let’s take what you’ve said specifically:
- Opposing homosexuality: this just isn’t true, there’s neither the call nor effort to do anything but to allow it in society and most social conservatives have enough libertarianism to suggest it’s no ones business. Now you’re not going to see me at pride but I have friends that are gay and I don’t have any problem with them and neither do social conservatives in Britain, generally speaking.
- Integration: this is actually the opposite of what’s true, every prominent social conservative out there wants to reduce immigration to ensure we can focus on a smaller number, to integrate people better.
- Multiculturalism: first one you’ve got right, I am totally against this in any society on the planet. You want to move to another country? Then you adopt their values and customs and integrate into their way of life. That’s true of people coming to the Far East here and it’s true of Brits on the Costa Del Sol.
- Secularism: again, totally false, religious freedom and atheist/agnostic freedom is prominent in social conservatism, it’s an ideology that pushes for freedom of thought, not the opposite. There are many social conservatives that are atheist and openly say it.
- Living out of wedlock/one parent families: there’s a bloody good reason for this, you’re far more likely to end up in a low income job or jobless and far more
likely to turn to crime, if one of your parents is not in your life. My parents got divorced when I was ten so I am not biased here, but a two parent household generally speaking, across all studies in the world, produces children more likely to become successful and abide by the law later in life. Only the modern left could argue against this point.
D
D
Deleted member 77198
Guest
Indeed. And you can see this in the way people vote (or don’t vote).
2019 General Election:
Labour 10.3m votes
Conservatives 13.9m votes
Registered voters who didn’t vote, 15.5m.
There’s all this talk of “the rise of the far right” “the rise in the split between left and right in Britain” and even “the rise of the SNP”; yet next to nobody ever votes for the far right and Labour were the only party to lose votes, plus more people didn’t vote than voted SNP in Scotland.
The Green Party gained more votes (339,078) in 2019 than the Conservatives did (304,402), and the Lib Dems gained ~3.2m, while Labour lost ~2.6m.
But despite any losses or gains from any party or the myth of the far right gaining traction; in the two most voted in elections since 1997 (2017+2019), non-voters still had the biggest impact on the outcome. Non-voters are the biggest political party in Britain!
Mostly because, as you say, most people are in the middle and they are sick to death of fringe nobodies who seem to have the biggest mouths, are most active on social media, and just can’t shut the fuck up with their minority crackpot ideals that nearly all of the rest of the country disagree with.