Political Labels

[Gutfright]

Can I involve supremacist and Ku Klux Klan?

Good question.

I wouldn't include KKK as it's a political group rather than an ideology per se.

But I see no reason not to include Ethno-nationalist/ Racial supremacist or something along those lines. I'd be a bit surprised if anyone actually selected that option, but you never know. The options for National Socialist and fascist have been selected already on this poll!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Out of the above, I'd say a democratic libertarian socialist, and have picked the corresponding options to construct that.

I'm sure people may wonder why I've not picked nationalist, given my obvious views on the matter. Whilst I am a Scottish Nationalist (i.e. I believe that Scotland should be an independent country), I would not say that I would be a nationalist in a more general sense. To take one definition:

"Nationalism, ideology based on the premise that the individual's loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests."

My nationalist view is not simply out of loyalty to my country, but my belief that Scotland would benefit from being autonomous. However, the principles that guide that view would be derived from my overall stance. So, it is a part of my identity, but I wouldn't say that it was a core descriptor for my own views.

I think this eloquently explains why so few people have selected Nationalist.

When I set up the poll, I envisioned the nationalist option being more popular than it turned out to be.

 

[Tracked]

I'll go for Other, which I'd consider "A Mix of Some of the Above, Sometimes"

 

[yorksrob]

My own belief is that only the party in command of the centre ground will win an election in today's Britain. As much as you might dislike welfare reform, things like the benefits cap and child benefit changes enjoyed widespread public support - not necessarily among the Twitterarti but certainly among the electorate. Even the 'bedroom tax' only divided opinion fairly evenly.

The recent disability payment proposals were far less popular and I'm glad they were dropped. Too many reforms like that and Cameron may lose the centre ground that he currently inhabits. A decent Labour leader could have made much more of that error.

I'm not so sure that the Blair/Thatcher consensus on economic liberalism will be set in stone for much longer. I predict that the housing crisis in the South East, for example, will drive popular opinion towards a more interventionist outlook.

 

[NoMorePacers]

I class myself as a far left socialist. If you don't know me well enough yet then try and get me started on the Port Talbot steelworks! P.S. I'm not a commie.

 

[pemma]

I think some people might be put off by certain labels due to the names being the same as or similar to political parties they don't agree with. For instance, if you're a traditionalist who doesn't agree with many Conservative party policies would you call yourself a conservative?

I find Christian Democrat an interesting one. That would usually be considered to be right of centre but the current Pope is left of centre and divisions within the Catholic church has seen the official viewpoint move to a more central position. For instance, a gay marriage isn't allowed in a Catholic Church but it's not considered morally wrong any more and it would be seen as wrong for a Catholic to protest against gay marriage.

 

[DarloRich]

still no idea which labels to choose...........

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I could have chosen more than the two I did, but would rather not muddy the waters. I've plumped for Democratic Socialist + Environmentalist.

As a short-hand, the difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist is that Tony Blair would probably identify as the former, whereas Jeremy Corbyn or Tony Benn would probably identify as the latter.

As for feminism, as a male I prefer to identify as "pro-feminist" than feminist (which is a label I don't believe I have the right to).

 

[unclefreddy]

I think Douglas Adams hit the nail on the head with his narrative from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The gist of which is "That those who most want to be in power are in fact the least suitable, those who are capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job" (Excerpt from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The Original Radio Scripts) Looking back at our P.M.s since Thatch came to power I'd say that hypothesis isn't too far off point. I do vote, but I have very little trust in our politicians and political system. So it had to be "Hey, don't label me man!"

 

[fowler9]

I could have chosen more than the two I did, but would rather not muddy the waters. I've plumped for Democratic Socialist + Environmentalist.

As a short-hand, the difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist is that Tony Blair would probably identify as the former, whereas Jeremy Corbyn or Tony Benn would probably identify as the latter.

As for feminism, as a male I prefer to identify as "pro-feminist" than feminist (which is a label I don't believe I have the right to).

There are no Facebook style likes on here but have one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think Douglas Adams hit the nail on the head with his narrative from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The gist of which is "That those who most want to be in power are in fact the least suitable, those who are capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job" (Excerpt from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The Original Radio Scripts) Looking back at our P.M.s since Thatch came to power I'd say that hypothesis isn't too far off point. I do vote, but I have very little trust in our politicians and political system. So it had to be "Hey, don't label me man!"

And another Facebook style like. Apologies if you don't like Facebook but I just wanted to agree, and obviously to waffle endlessly.

 

[NY Yankee]

I think some people might be put off by certain labels due to the names being the same as or similar to political parties they don't agree with. For instance, if you're a traditionalist who doesn't agree with many Conservative party policies would you call yourself a conservative?

I find Christian Democrat an interesting one. That would usually be considered to be right of centre but the current Pope is left of centre and divisions within the Catholic church has seen the official viewpoint move to a more central position. For instance, a gay marriage isn't allowed in a Catholic Church but it's not considered morally wrong any more and it would be seen as wrong for a Catholic to protest against gay marriage.

I never even heard of half of these terms. What's the difference between a Democratic socialist and Social Democrat? I'm going to assume that a Christian Democrat is a religious person who doesn't use religion as a pretense for antagonizing the LGBT community. I fit into that label.

I previously discussed my democratic beliefs (providing benefits for people who need it, anti-war, allowing people to practice Islam as long as it's not abused, being anti-gun control since gun control doesn't fix the problem, it only hides it, and investing in mass transit.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I never even heard of half of these terms. What's the difference between a Democratic socialist and Social Democrat? I'm going to assume that a Christian Democrat is a religious person who doesn't use religion as a pretense for antagonizing the LGBT community. I fit into that label.

I previously discussed my democratic beliefs (providing benefits for people who need it, anti-war, allowing people to practice Islam as long as it's not abused, being anti-gun control since gun control doesn't fix the problem, it only hides it, and investing in mass transit.

I'm not sure how I'd define Christian Democrats for a UK (or indeed US) audience, but Kanzlerin Merkel's party is the CDU or Christian Democrats. The party was traditionally the equivalent of the British Conservative Party in the Helmut Kohl era but these days is more of a New Labour (without the BS) kind of thing.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In Ulster, there is the Social Democratic and Labour Party. Would anyone with any knowledge of Ulster politics on this forum call the supporters of that party Social Democrats?

 

[backontrack]

I class myself as a far left socialist. If you don't know me well enough yet then try and get me started on the Port Talbot steelworks! P.S. I'm not a commie.

Look at my post title.

 

[Gutfright]

Another label which could, perhaps, have been added to the list is "progressive". Although it's something that blurs the line between personal belief and political philosophy, it does raise some political questions.

Should the state mandate a minimum body size in advertising, to avoid promoting eating disorders and unrealistic expectations of how women should look? Should there be racially segregated 'safe spaces' to protect minorities from potentially upsetting words? Should the state enforce positive discrimination to redress historical injustices to marginalised groups? Should hate speech be illegal, and how does one decide what is and isn't hate speech?

I'm not sure that there are easy answers to questions like these, but they certainly raise issues about what role the government should play in shaping society.

 

[kegdr]

If I have to give myself a label I usually say I'm a social democrat.

I'm quite liberal on social issues - pro-LGBT rights, pro-choice etc.

Economically, I have sympathies with the Keynesian theories and believe in a mixed economy where both the public and private sectors can flourish, while maintaining a strong safety net for those who have lost work or cannot work.

I'm a big proponent of the NHS, and also advocate substantial investment in education and transport (not only in the railways ).

I'm in favour of renewing Trident and maintaining at least 2% of GDP on defence.

 

[Barn]

Another label which could, perhaps, have been added to the list is "progressive". Although it's something that blurs the line between personal belief and political philosophy, it does raise some political questions.

Should the state mandate a minimum body size in advertising, to avoid promoting eating disorders and unrealistic expectations of how women should look? Should there be racially segregated 'safe spaces' to protect minorities from potentially upsetting words? Should the state enforce positive discrimination to redress historical injustices to marginalised groups? Should hate speech be illegal, and how does one decide what is and isn't hate speech?

I'm not sure that there are easy answers to questions like these, but they certainly raise issues about what role the government should play in shaping society.

There are very easy answers to these!

(1) No
(2) No
(3) No
(4) Yes if it incites violence, otherwise no

I'm guessing you read The Guardian.

 

[backontrack]

There are very easy answers to these!

(1) No
(2) No
(3) No
(4) Yes if it incites violence, otherwise no

I'm guessing you read The Guardian.

Perhaps, but reading The Guardian does not mean that you answer these questions any differently to the way you did.

 

[Barn]

Perhaps, but reading The Guardian does not mean that you answer these questions any differently to the way you did.

Depends on whether you read it for giggles or for instruction.

 

[backontrack]

Depends on whether you read it for giggles or for instruction.

No, it doesn't! Guardian readers aren't all the same...

 

[Gutfright]

There are very easy answers to these!

(1) No
(2) No
(3) No
(4) Yes if it incites violence, otherwise no

I'm guessing you read The Guardian.

The Grauniad has an excellent football section, and I admit to reading the right-on progressive opinion pieces from time to time.

Yes, some of the articles they publish are rabid "all straight cis white men are scum who should self-flagellate constantly to atone for the original sin of being born with a willy" type nonsense. A lot of their articles are slightly more reasonable, and point out that in many ways women, LGBTQIA+ (it's a real acronym. Look it up), and BAME people do get a raw deal.

But none of that is really relevant. The point is that progressivism could be seen as a political movement with political demands.

 

[Barn]

But none of that is really relevant. The point is that progressivism could be seen as a political movement with political demands.

Progressivism is still a little too difficult to describe to be its own movement. When the coalition was being formed all three parties tried to describe themselves as progressives.

But yes, I agree that the middle class, croissant-eating, champagne-quaffing, Guardian-reading, virtue-signalling, offence-taking, self-flagellating, Twitter-tweeting, privilege-checking, banker-bashing, gender-denying, quota-loving, Britain-hating mindset is becoming a bit of a movement of its own.

I still think it is noisier than it is numerous, though. Its biggest weakness is that it tends to assume that everyone agrees (unless they're Tory Scum™ of course). The general election result came as a huge shock to them.

 

[Gutfright]

I agree that the middle class, croissant-eating, champagne-quaffing, Guardian-reading, virtue-signalling, offence-taking, self-flagellating, Twitter-tweeting, privilege-checking, banker-bashing, gender-denying, quota-loving, Britain-hating mindset is becoming a bit of a movement of its own.

I must take issue with this outrageous stereotyping of progressives.

The humble croissant is far too passé nowadays, and besides think of all the gluten. It's organic, free range fair trade quinoa these days!

 

[Barn]

I must take issue with this outrageous stereotyping of progressives.

The humble croissant is far too passé nowadays, and besides think of all the gluten. It's organic, free range fair trade quinoa these days!

Haha! Have you got to the stage where you can look at the word 'quinoa' without thinking first of the wrong pronunciation?

PS: Did you know that you can now pop in to your local Waitrose for some responsibly-sourced tree sap? http://waitrose.pressarea.com/pressrelease/details/78/PRODUCT NEWS_12/5900

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The humble croissant is far too passé nowadays, and besides think of all the gluten. It's organic, free range fair trade quinoa these days!

Quinoa is not a true cereal as it is not a member of the true grass family of plants.

 

[Barn]

Quinoa is not a true cereal as it is not a member of the true grass family of plants.

I love this forum.

 

[backontrack]

I love this forum.

Obviously the 'progressive' type of cereal is much inferior to the kind that grows inside the Cheshire Golden Triangle... :P
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I must take issue with this outrageous stereotyping of progressives.

The humble croissant is far too passé nowadays, and besides think of all the gluten. It's organic, free range fair trade quinoa these days!

Ugh, think of all the calories in a pasty croissant! After that, I'd need a lengthy detox in a big bath of ghee and almond milk.

 

[GatwickDepress]

But yes, I agree that the middle class, croissant-eating, champagne-quaffing, Guardian-reading, virtue-signalling, offence-taking, self-flagellating, Twitter-tweeting, privilege-checking, banker-bashing, gender-denying, quota-loving, Britain-hating mindset is becoming a bit of a movement of its own.

The number of right-wing MPs found in Soho suggest you don't need to be left-wing to enjoy a bit of that.

Or indeed consider themselves part of the political spectrum at all! Quod erat demonstrandum.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Obviously the 'progressive' type of cereal is much inferior to the kind that grows inside the Cheshire Golden Triangle... :P

Well, since quinoa was used as a cultivated domestic grain source by the ethnic peoples of the north-western areas of South America for at least two thousand years before the Spanish Invasion occurred, to call it "progressive" is rather stretching the meaning of that word somewhat.

Do not forget that those same Spanish invaders banned the cultivation of that crop and required wheat to be grown in lieu of that crop.

 

[backontrack]

Well, since quinoa was used as a cultivated domestic grain source by the ethnic peoples of the north-western areas of South America for at least two thousand years before the Spanish Invasion occurred, to call it "progressive" is rather stretching the meaning of that word somewhat.

Do not forget that those same Spanish invaders banned the cultivation of that crop and required wheat to be grown in lieu of that crop.

Did they also require flippancy to be read as total seriousness?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Did they also require flippancy to be read as total seriousness?

I am sure that the Spanish Invaders would indeed have some draconian "group punishment" ready for the merest hint of "flippancy" by those indigenous peoples...