DS Forums

 
 

Why does society veer to the 'right'?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29-12-2016, 09:19
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,113
In some cases it is to the left - i.e. communist societies. However, in the West this isn't generally the case.
Most people are by nature conservatives wanting to conserve what they have.
Annsyre is online now   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 29-12-2016, 09:21
paulschapman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 24,735
In some cases it is to the left - i.e. communist societies. However, in the West this isn't generally the case.
The US, and UK you can date this to the Magna Carta in 1216 - at that point the monarch ceased to be an absolute ruler - the power of the monarch has been eroded since, most notably during the English Civil War and the Bill of Rights in 1689.

The later decline of the Feudal System also eroded the power of the aristocracy - which arose after the Norman Invasion of 1066 and replaced it with a middle class.

France had the revolution in 1789 created a republic but this predates the publication of Das Kapital by Karl Marx and The condition of the English Working people by Friedrich Engels. The later Empire spread French thinking over much of Europe.

Post Marx/Engels those societies that remained Feudal - (such as Russia) went Communist.

|After World War II what was then USSR still held much of Eastern Europe there was 50 years of Cold War with the US. Both sides used proxies to increase there influence and power - this is why countries such as Afghanistan went communist - because Russia was financing groups sympathetic to the Communist cause (to be fair the US was doing the same for right wing groups).

Under Gorbachev Russia was no longer able to pay to keep Eastern European Communist regimes going - hence there later collapse and the subsequent collapse of Communism in Russia itself.
paulschapman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 09:30
ustarion
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,483
England has had middle of the road governments for my whole life.

The Tory's have just been a bit better at delivering them than labour.
Maybe in terms of government, but it was increasing popularity of right wing UKIP which made Cameron offer that referendum.
ustarion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 09:31
paulschapman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 24,735
Maybe in terms of government, but it was increasing popularity of right wing UKIP which made Cameron offer that referendum.
Was UKIP Popular or the idea of leaving the EU?
paulschapman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 09:54
corf
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,458
This time I believe it is due to the 20 years of liberal wins of social issues and then the empowerment of those wins via political correctness. The name calling of people with other views like we saw over brexit with racist, xenophobic, stupid, uneducated etc.

The liberal viewpoint became so strong and presented as the only correct viewpoint that it backed everyone with different views into a corner. They became embarrased about their views, they hid their voting plans and were ready to turn en mass to the right or the left. Most countries went right, some with more facist pasts that haunt recent memories - will turn left. Like Spain maybe...
corf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 10:02
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
I think you are just being a bit fickle neither of us lived under a truly left or right wing government.

What were the left of your youth campaigning for,?
I wanted to see the creation of a classless, egalitarian state where the means of production were socially owned.

I still do.
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 10:05
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
Seems to be seen so nowadays. They'd describe themselves as left.
I'd describe myself as just left of centre if I had to put myself on the political spectrum. But nowadays I'm apparently right wing or far right according to some of these leftist nutcases. They've hijacked the left and appropriated it to serve their own ends.

So I'd suggest that we haven't really veered to the right. We've veered more to the left so everything to the right of what is todays left appears to be more to the right than it really is.
I don't know if I've explained that very well. To put it another way I'd say that the entire political spectrum has shifted to the left so that everything seems to be more to the right than it may have done before.
So what constitutes the true left in yoiur view? Is a socialist a nutcase?
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 10:08
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
People are naturally selfish and parochial, so any push to the left is going to be uphill.
Man is not born selfish. His societal surroundings may or may not subsequently make him so, however.
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 10:13
Ennerjee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 4,453
Well, that's not the left then, is it?
But it has become the Left hasn't it?

Don't forget it's often the elitest middle-class who get involved in the Left out of guilt and then take it over, but have very little understanding of the poor's plight and end up adopting lofty identity politics.

Currently we have the examples of Corbyn, Abbott, Thornberry, Hunt. Previously there was Blair, Mandelson and Harman.

Of course originally there was Marx and the intellectual Left.
Ennerjee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 10:40
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,113
But it has become the Left hasn't it?

Don't forget it's often the elitest middle-class who get involved in the Left out of guilt and then take it over, but have very little understanding of the poor's plight and end up adopting lofty identity politics.

Currently we have the examples of Corbyn, Abbott, Thornberry, Hunt. Previously there was Blair, Mandelson and Harman.

Of course originally there was Marx and the intellectual Left.
And upper middle class university educated people auch as Burgess, McLean, Philby, Blunt and Faircross.

And people like Atlee upper middle class and Oxford Educated drawn into politics of the left through a charity supported by his fee-paying prep school.
Annsyre is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 11:16
NeverEnough
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,863
Man is not born selfish. His societal surroundings may or may not subsequently make him so, however.
If man is not born selfish put a group of toddlers in a circle. Open a box of sweets and say "help yourself". And watch the squabbling over the most tastey treats.
NeverEnough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 11:25
Ennerjee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 4,453
Unfortunately I have never lived in a left wing UK - and I'm in my 60s and have always lived here.
Didn't we come tantalisingly close though in the 1970s? If Labour had won in 1979 then I would've predicted a Socialist dominated Labour Party with Tony Benn leading it.
Ennerjee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 11:34
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,483
Man is not born selfish. His societal surroundings may or may not subsequently make him so, however.
Not so sure. Survival instinct "me rather than you" is pretty basic to life.
alan29 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 11:51
vanzandtfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,588
In some cases it is to the left - i.e. communist societies. However, in the West this isn't generally the case.
Countries moves to both the left and the right, often at the same time. I think your post is really asking why are the UK and the US have recently moved to the right, and imo the answer is that while the electorate in the referendum and the US election both wanted change, the "left" has positioned itself as the defender of the status quo. The DNC pushed Clinton rather than Saunders, while the Labour Party ensured that they were united behind Remain, even when the leader is a leaver. If the left refuse to offer change, where else are people going to turn except the right?
vanzandtfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:14
Ennerjee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 4,453
People are naturally selfish and parochial, so any push to the left is going to be uphill.
The Socialists wouldn't agree. They tell us that a baby will share its food with others and it's simply society that teaches them how to be greedy.

I struggle with that theory as survival is ultimately a selfish instinct whether it be for the immediate grouping or, in severe circumstances, oneself.

If you compromise your own survival for others then you can put the whole group in jeopardy. Weak members of a group are not as strong as a smaller number of stronger ones.

It's the law of the jungle and survival of the fittest.
Ennerjee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:29
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,276
Most people are by nature conservatives wanting to conserve what they have.
Conservative in a political sense simply means wanting things to remain the same as they have been in the past.

Man is not born selfish. His societal surroundings may or may not subsequently make him so, however.
Man is born helpless and needs to be nurtured and supported almost immediately.
So, Nature combined with Nurture produces the man/woman.

If man is not born selfish put a group of toddlers in a circle. Open a box of sweets and say "help yourself". And watch the squabbling over the most tastey treats.
That shows you how quickly the nature/nurture influences kick in.

Not so sure. Survival instinct "me rather than you" is pretty basic to life.
The survival instinct normally applies to dangerous situations and is simply about keeping yourself alive. It is not directly about others at all.

Is what you are talking about not better characterised as 'I'm all right, Jack'.

It is just as valid to suggest that our natural/nurtured attitude to others is actually to look out for others mainly for selfish reasons, i.e. the misfortune of others could one day be me?
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:33
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,276
The Socialists wouldn't agree. They tell us that a baby will share its food with others and it's simply society that teaches them how to be greedy.

I struggle with that theory as survival is ultimately a selfish instinct whether it be for the immediate grouping or, in severe circumstances, oneself.

If you compromise your own survival for others then you can put the whole group in jeopardy. Weak members of a group are not as strong as a smaller number of stronger ones.

It's the law of the jungle and survival of the fittest.
You mean survival of the richest!

Survival is dependent on access to resources.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 12:43
bigpod
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 278
The country has always been pretty much Centrist. Labour and Conservatives are in competition for that group. I don't think society really veers one way another; the parties change policy to try to gain the support of that group. If the Conservatives go too far right they will lose. We can already see thee problemss going to far left has caused the Labour party.
bigpod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:08
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
But it has become the Left hasn't it?

Don't forget it's often the elitest middle-class who get involved in the Left out of guilt and then take it over, but have very little understanding of the poor's plight and end up adopting lofty identity politics.

Currently we have the examples of Corbyn, Abbott, Thornberry, Hunt. Previously there was Blair, Mandelson and Harman.

Of course originally there was Marx and the intellectual Left.
No. The concepts of Marxism don't change because some regard capitalist-supporting social democrats as being "left".
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:09
Annsyre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 97,113
Conservative in a political sense simply means wanting things to remain the same as they have been in the past.



Man is born helpless and needs to be nurtured and supported almost immediately.
So, Nature combined with Nurture produces the man/woman.



That shows you how quickly the nature/nurture influences kick in.



The survival instinct normally applies to dangerous situations and is simply about keeping yourself alive. It is not directly about others at all.

Is what you are talking about not better characterised as 'I'm all right, Jack'.

It is just as valid to suggest that our natural/nurtured attitude to others is actually to look out for others mainly for selfish reasons, i.e. the misfortune of others could one day be me?
There is nothing inherently wrong in wanting stability and not revolotuion. This nation has developed hrough evolution.
Annsyre is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:13
ustarion
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,483
Countries moves to both the left and the right, often at the same time. I think your post is really asking why are the UK and the US have recently moved to the right, and imo the answer is that while the electorate in the referendum and the US election both wanted change, the "left" has positioned itself as the defender of the status quo. The DNC pushed Clinton rather than Saunders, while the Labour Party ensured that they were united behind Remain, even when the leader is a leaver. If the left refuse to offer change, where else are people going to turn except the right?
This has a longer history than that I think
ustarion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:13
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
Didn't we come tantalisingly close though in the 1970s? If Labour had won in 1979 then I would've predicted a Socialist dominated Labour Party with Tony Benn leading it.
We could have been halfway there if Foot had won - with Benn leading it would have been even better!
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:15
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
Not so sure. Survival instinct "me rather than you" is pretty basic to life.
The survival instinct is not selfishness - and man, as he mainly lives in organised societies, does not need a survival instinct in the main (although it will always be there).

There is enough to go round for all.
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:18
GreatGodPan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35,814
The Socialists wouldn't agree. [1] They tell us that a baby will share its food with others and it's simply society that teaches them how to be greedy.

I struggle with that theory as survival is ultimately a selfish instinct whether it be for the immediate grouping or, in severe circumstances, oneself.

If you compromise your own survival for others then you can put the whole group in jeopardy. Weak members of a group are not as strong as a smaller number of stronger ones.
[2]
It's the law of the jungle and survival of the fittest
.
1. Do they?

2. No it isn't. At present it is more the survival of the richest.
GreatGodPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 13:56
Ennerjee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 4,453
Because people are naturally more inclined towards vices like selfishness and greed. And then those with wealth end up in positions of power and influence (eg own newspapers and vast media consortia) and perpetuate their doctrine.

When you think of my parents' generation eg my mum who was born in a rented hovel, and through left-wing policies then got put (with her family) in a council house with electricity and hot water, got free healthcare, free schooling, free secondary education, free college education, free school meals etc, you can see how much society has now changed and lurched to the right.

If mum were born now she'd probably be living in a one-roomed flat with her whole family, and would be relying on foodbanks for meals.
After WW2 the country adopted the mixed economy which worked relatively well while people were already accustomed to being controlled by conscription, rationing and under enemy attack. People pulled together for the common good in order to win the War.

My mother too benefited from a council house, as did approximately 40% of the population, as well as free healthcare, etc., but never electricity.

I'm not sure what my mother would do now in the same circumstances, however, priority is given to families with children.
Ennerjee is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:12.