Too Far Left Or Too Far Right? How About The Middle?
Bradleigh
Veteran
Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia
shlaifu wrote:
uncommondenominator wrote:
Just because Nationalization and Nationalism both contain the same root word "nation" doesn't mean they have the same ideological roots.
Nationalization refers to the idea that a government runs an operation, as opposed to privatization, where an operation is privately controlled. Generally speaking, nationalized health care, for example, is a liberal idea, whereas privatized healthcare is generally a conservative idea.
...
Nationalization refers to the idea that a government runs an operation, as opposed to privatization, where an operation is privately controlled. Generally speaking, nationalized health care, for example, is a liberal idea, whereas privatized healthcare is generally a conservative idea.
...
You're speaking about America here. Because in Europe, nationalized healthcare is mostly a socialdemocratic and conservative idea, and privatizing healthcare is considered liberal - but meaning: economically liberal.
The liberal party of Germany, when in coalition with the conservatives a decade ago, voted against gay marriage, because they aren't exactly socially liberal, but economically.
Liberalalism and Neoliberalism are specific sets of ideas about government and the economy, and they do not imply social liberalism.
The Republicans are very economically liberal.
So are the Democrats. I.e.,they are Liberalist.
It's also where "Liberal democracy" becomes a contradiction: is this Liberalism, or democracy now?
They're not totally exclusive, just: democracy is kinda pointless in a Liberalist state.
But thst makes something like a docial democracy "illiberal". It impinges on certain *economic* freedoms.
But who would ever want to be "illiberal" - even though, all itay mean is that you're for public healthcare.
I think that this goes into different ideas of the word "liberal". Here in Australia the conservative party is literally called liberal. They are not socially liberal but economically liberal in the sense that they want to remove and prevent regulation (cut taxes). It is not really a conflicting idea, since conservatism is generally the party of keeping existing power system, which generally is keeping the rich the rich, and love to convince other people that they too could win the economic game and keep as much money to themselves by embracing a system that actually puts them at a disadvantage of breaking out of their economic class.
You can connect this liberal push for deregulation and aversion to change with the ideals of nationalism. The same sort of person who will blindly follow their national pride are the same that will buy into the myth that they are an exceptional person who will be able to make it rich by working hard. Taking pride in avoiding their idea of handouts, believing in the just-world fallacy, and a refusal that the system they are a part of is putting them and other people at a disadvantage. They would rather believe in charities rather than a government system that could be more effective than whimsical donations that might not go where things are needed. Also tending to be even more welcoming than those more on the left to people considered their in group , but that in group is considerably smaller, often requiring scapegoats of others that are the ones stopping them from succeeding in their "just" system.
The economic liberalism of conservativism is most certainly connected to the hard selling of capitalism as a totally free and just system that anyone could succeed if they work hard enough. The general step that has been taken after moving past seeing monarchies as inherently better. Although even liberal conservatives are often looking for some master to rule over them, a Trump that they will worship.
_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall
KT67 wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
KT67 wrote:
By the way I believe there's 2 kinds of nationalism in British politics today and the only mainstream one is left wing & not a bad thing.
The mainstream, left wing one is independence movements in Wales/parts of Ireland/Scotland. There's even a party which calls for the devolution of Yorkshire, England's largest county. None of these parties would want to get rid of people of a certain heritage from the country/county if their goals were achieved. It's simply about shifting the capital/source of power/government.
BNP, on the other hand, have the ambition to make Britain 'British again'. The only way to understand this is 'anglo Saxon again' or at least 'white again'. The only way to do that peacefully would be through repatriation of people, some of whom have been here generations. I do not believe this can be done peacefully or that it is a desirable outcome. This is what I mean by 'only liking people like themselves'.
The mainstream, left wing one is independence movements in Wales/parts of Ireland/Scotland. There's even a party which calls for the devolution of Yorkshire, England's largest county. None of these parties would want to get rid of people of a certain heritage from the country/county if their goals were achieved. It's simply about shifting the capital/source of power/government.
BNP, on the other hand, have the ambition to make Britain 'British again'. The only way to understand this is 'anglo Saxon again' or at least 'white again'. The only way to do that peacefully would be through repatriation of people, some of whom have been here generations. I do not believe this can be done peacefully or that it is a desirable outcome. This is what I mean by 'only liking people like themselves'.
If Scottish nationalism was a simple matter of devolution then it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. Unfortunately it is a nationalist movement, seeking independence. This is bad for the same reason that Brexit is bad - it’s throwing away co-operation (and the freedoms and opportunities we get from that co-operation) for identitarian reasons.
That said, while I think Scottish independence and Brexit are bad things, you’re right to say that they’re not as bad as ethnic nationalism.
I don't think it would necessarily be that way.
Scottish independence might look like an independent Scottish nation joining the EU.
There's a reason for the meme with the ex-Brit after Brexit.
Doesn’t matter whether Scotland joins the EU. The UK is much more important to Scotland than the EU. It’s basically the same as how Brexiteers go on about how leaving the EU will allow for more trade with Pacific nations - maybe, but it’s never going to make up for breaking up with your closest partner!
Mountain Goat wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
KT67 wrote:
By the way I believe there's 2 kinds of nationalism in British politics today and the only mainstream one is left wing & not a bad thing.
The mainstream, left wing one is independence movements in Wales/parts of Ireland/Scotland. There's even a party which calls for the devolution of Yorkshire, England's largest county. None of these parties would want to get rid of people of a certain heritage from the country/county if their goals were achieved. It's simply about shifting the capital/source of power/government.
BNP, on the other hand, have the ambition to make Britain 'British again'. The only way to understand this is 'anglo Saxon again' or at least 'white again'. The only way to do that peacefully would be through repatriation of people, some of whom have been here generations. I do not believe this can be done peacefully or that it is a desirable outcome. This is what I mean by 'only liking people like themselves'.
The mainstream, left wing one is independence movements in Wales/parts of Ireland/Scotland. There's even a party which calls for the devolution of Yorkshire, England's largest county. None of these parties would want to get rid of people of a certain heritage from the country/county if their goals were achieved. It's simply about shifting the capital/source of power/government.
BNP, on the other hand, have the ambition to make Britain 'British again'. The only way to understand this is 'anglo Saxon again' or at least 'white again'. The only way to do that peacefully would be through repatriation of people, some of whom have been here generations. I do not believe this can be done peacefully or that it is a desirable outcome. This is what I mean by 'only liking people like themselves'.
If Scottish nationalism was a simple matter of devolution then it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. Unfortunately it is a nationalist movement, seeking independence. This is bad for the same reason that Brexit is bad - it’s throwing away co-operation (and the freedoms and opportunities we get from that co-operation) for identitarian reasons.
That said, while I think Scottish independence and Brexit are bad things, you’re right to say that they’re not as bad as ethnic nationalism.
I need to say something here so you can understand why many of us voted for Brexit and it had NOTHING to do with immigration or to do with a hate for other countries or a drive for independence for the sake of it, but it was how the EU has decimated the small businesses and given our taxes to the rich companies and their shareholders.
Every time this element started being talked about on TV, the newscasters cut them off and brought up immigration, so the real things which were going on were never exposed.
1. We did not vote to join the EU. We have never been full EU members. Somehow somewhere we find someone has signed us up to join without the peoples permission.
2. Ok. We have been part of the EU.
3. I have really noticed my area of the country significantly going downhill since we became part of the EU. Farming has never had it worse. Fishing has been decimated. Nearly all our retail jobs have been ruined.
I grew up and was trained in the retail sector because I had failed at a general engineering course, and I did not know which line to head for, and I sort of found myself working in a bicycle shop. But over the years while working, I have had some of the best training in retail that one can get. (At one point I ended up as a head of a bicycle department. Not good foe me because those two and a half years I could not "Switch off" when I got back home or the week holiday we had each year. I also did nearly twice the hours I was paid for and I was one of the highest paid in the store and that was just over half minimum wage that came in just after I left).
When I first started in the retail trade, nearly all retail related jobs were full time and due to this one could just about support a family if working in such a job.
When we joined the EU, we started having "Trade deals". These trade deals decimated the retail industry and here is why. They were grants given to any retail establishment which came out of the British tax payers purse.
To qualify the business had to have ovet 1500 employees.
This created a problem. Even stores like Halfords with over 100 stores did not have 1500 employees, so they (Like most of the chain stores in the retail trade) started only employing part time. They also found back then that they did not have to pay a penny when it came to their side of national insurance so most retail employees who were on low wages had no hope of getting their state pension stamps. There are thousands of people like me that due to the EU, we are not going to get our state pensions.
Now something else happened. In the past VAT was brought in and set at a level that ONLY the large companies who could buy in bulk would have to charge it. The concept was that it came in as an "Equalizer" so the small shops were on a fair playing field, as there were concerns that with the large retail chainstore companies able to buy in bulk and undercut the small shops, that the small shops would not survive.
But then came the EU and VAT threshold was lowered to include most small shops and the VAT amount zoomed up. Secondhand never used to be carged VAT and shoes, clothes etc were exempt. The reason for these exemptions were that VAT was supposed to be only for non essentials.
But anyway. Going back to how things changed, the big companies ALSO had grants if they set up new stores. So every so often they would cloose inner town stores and move to out if town places, and then move again. Not ONLY were their business rates cheap, but these grants paid for their business rates for so many years. Small shops were not eligable for these grants. The grants also pay for a full kit of uniform for staff which includes all safety wear like steel toe cap boots, coats, jackets etc... BUT rarely do the employees ever get them.
And as a MASSIVE tax dodge, the big retail chain stores are able to use their grants by sending them direct to the Far East manufacturers. How is this a massive tax dodge?
First lets take the bicycle industry. Practically everything is now made in the Far East despite stickers saying "Made in the USA" or "Made in Britain". (Made now can mean "Assembled" which is a totally different thing).
Now ok, the Far East are very good at aking bicycles and bicycle parts at very competitive prices so fair enough.
Now these grants destroyed the British manufacturing of bicycles but forget that for now. How are the companies managing to avoid paying tax?
Well. Look at a small independent bike shop. Lets say they buy in a bicycle. The difference between buying a bike in and the retail price used to be 30%. Now it is 20% for most bicycle suppliers they buy from. (Most bicycle makes are now suppliers and not manufacturers). The bikes have to be imported and they have to pay the full amount of import tax. Each time they are sold from one part of the chain to the other more tax is added.
Now look at the large retail chain stores. They buy direct so they avoid at least two lots of tax on the price of the bike.
But these grants.... Lets say for example, that a £240 bicycle in retail price cost around £40 to manufacture. (An equivalent bicycle in a small independent shop these days would be purchased for £250 and sold for £280 and it requires an hours work to assemble it and make sure it is safe for the road).
Now the grants are given directly to the Far East in trade agreements, so the cost to the company to buy each bicycle ends up being a small fraction of its real manufacturing cost.
I was really surprized when I found out about this and I was given a trade price price for a single bicycle as I had been in the bicycle trade for years so I had more then a rough idea what trade prices were. (I could almost tell you the trade price if I saw the retail price if it came via the traditional means).
But a certain bicycle which was one of the most popular sellers and it sold for £240 as a retail price was imported to the store including ALL import duties ad taxes and transport costs included into the price. Just £11.73p. That is thousands of percentage profit. And EU grants to pay for staff wages for so many years every time a store relocates... (5 years it was where I worked).
To add insult to injury, a certain company happened to approach the British government claiming it was struggling to compete with the small bike shops here in my area of Wales. They were given more EU grants to buy out the more profitable of these shops, so they now own these shops outright having not paid a penny. And the very small amount left (They were not allowed to own them all as it would be a monopoly), most have since gone bankrupt so I can only think of two shops (And one has turned into a cafe and only sells a very limited amount of high end bikes a year and the other mainly concentrates on high end bikes) in a 50 mile radius that remains independent and the 50 mile radius includes a city and many large towns which once had independent bicycle shops.
Now the same thing has been happening in nearly all retail sectors. You wonder where your small independent shops have gone? The EU has made it impossible for them to survive.
Do you have any citations for any of this? I don’t believe the EU has ever provided funds specifically targeted at big companies - usually they do the opposite. Certainly they’re not concerned about whether chains of bike shops are struggling to compete with independent shops in Wales. Small businesses in Wales (particularly innovative businesses) were massive beneficiaries of EU funding. You can read about it here: https://gov.wales/eu-funds
I’m afraid you’re completely wrong about agriculture. The EU’s Common Agricultural Policy is hugely favourable to European farmers, which is why the NFU is making such a fuss about Brexit. And fishing is a declining industry the world over, Wales has always been relatively insignificant compared to Scotland and the North East. And we were full members of the EU and we did vote to join it.
CockneyRebel
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 121,636
Location: In my own little country
