I AM slowly figuring out the tricks to avoid seeming Right-wing. This is important, because we all know Right-wing means nasty.
Right-wingers, for instance, are killjoys who tell us divorce tends to hurt children. They warn that we play with fire while our culture celebrates violence and sleaze. They complain that authority just doesn’t have respect now. I realise now that to say such things does you no good at all. Or rather, to say such things in this way just makes you look an idiot.
But – good news! – several groups who tend to the Left have shown me how to sound the same warnings without losing ideological cred.
Teacher unions and principal associations, for example, now warn us that violence against teachers is rising, so much so that some teachers have self-defence lessons.
Raging parents are “causing havoc” What is the answer? An “awareness campaign” and training for staff, says the new union, Safety and Security in Schools Advisory Committee.
Then the Catholic Education Commission waved around funky Melbourne University research that shows schools are battling a surge in student welfare woes, much of it caused by divorce, drugs and “defiant behaviours” – aka rudeness, thanks to slack parenting. Answer? Cash for counselling and the like.
It’s cute that so many experts still think a bit of counselling, lessons in “appropriate behaviours” and slick ads on TV will fix the sick results of our new two-fingers culture of selfishness and subversion.
But let me not quibble with the “solutions”. It’s enough for today that we agree on the problems. I guess that makes us all Left-wingers now. Or is it Right-wingers? I forget.
By: Grey Area - 6th June 2004 at 14:03
Reasonable point, Geforce. Now, how constitutional and democratic do you think the McCarthy witch-hunts were?
Just names for sides, as I said earlier. 🙁
By: Geforce - 6th June 2004 at 14:00
True, you can always manipulate philosophy. Stalin and Robbespiere were ultra-democratic. They were so democratic they not only thought they represented the nation, they WERE the nation. The Soviet-constitutions of Stalin and the one of 1977, were the most liberal ever. All rights, including rights on education, health service, free opinions, free press … However, the latest phrase (article 59 or so) said: all rights can be suspended if the individuals are not performing their duties towards the community. This opened the door for a wide interpretation. Not performing their duties, like for instance, Jews wanting to start a new life in Israel, legitimised the gov’t to punish them. Same for the ultra-democratic constitution of the Jacobins (don’t know this word in English, only in French, sorry). Liberal democracy was not going far enough because it didn’t represent the people as a whole, only some individuals. So, the thought the state should be the people (people’s republic), and hence, being too democratic will result in communism, dictatorship.
I love constitutions 😀 I guess you figured that out already.
By: Hand87_5 - 6th June 2004 at 13:54
Absolute cobbswabble. I am right wing and this certainly does NOT mean I am nasty. I just want all countries to look after their own. Besides, are you telling me that communism is good (its left wing, and its bloody evil). Yet another stupid coment by all the do gooders out there.
Communism theory is no doubt good.
Unfortunately every kind of soviet style implementation of communism is awful and evil. (USSR , China , Cuba , North Korea etc …) just because this theory , is been turned into an other kind of dictature.
It’s for my point of view the same with capitalism.
Capitalism theory ,is basically ‘let’s to Cies do what they with no limits , they will earn money and everyone will be happy”.
Fine : that’s what’s implemented in some coutries and look what’s happen : they earn money , make a FEW people very rich , and they consider that they aren’t rich enough. They outsource plenty of jobs in India , China etc to earn more.
Therefore only a few folks enjoy the system in the long term.
What is the future:
The countries were the high buying potential is (USA , Europe , Japan) are creating more and more unempoyement ; Just were are the people who potentially buy the products made by the big company who outsource …
Don’t you think that there is a problem somewhere ???
By: Geforce - 6th June 2004 at 13:41
Vlaams Blok
Another comment (if anyone’s interrested). In Belgium we have problems with a “undemocratic party” called Vlaams Blok. It is extreme rightwing, xenophobic, conservative, nationalist (not racist though), anti-liberal and in some ways, yes, it’s questioning the legitimacy of Belgium as a state. So all the other parties (democratic front united in a treaty called cordon sanitair) refuse to cooperate with this party, which is expected to become Belgium’s 3rd largest and Flanders 2nd largest party next week! No problem so far, parties are allowed to form a gov’t with who they want. But now, these ‘democratic’ parties are using the justice system AND the constitution to ban this party from the parliament, to make it illegal. They use the argument that nazi’s also went to power democratic.
This is the undemocratic part. A democracy should be able to sustain all kinds of different ideas and philosophies, how extremist and xenophobic they may sound, because that IS democracy. In the Netherlands they handled the problems better: they formed a gov’t with the LPF (Pim Fortuyn). After a few weeks the gov’t collapsed and everyone blaimed democracy for not functioning well. In fact, democracy did function! In Belgium, it’s questionable. We try to ban VB from parliament using constitutional rights (even though VB doesn’t question democracy itself, it is, formally a democratic party, not even racist), but the outcome is selfish because the political parties only want the voters of VB to vote for their party! I’m not going to vote VB, because I’m not xenophobic nor extreme-right wing or anti-Belgium, not because I find the party undemocratic.
Any other ideas, about Belgium or other countries having the same problems (LPF, FN, Forza Italia etc). Saying what I just said here in Belgium is not-done though, if I defend the existance of a party like VB everyone would think I support the ideas of the party, in contrary, I support the existence of democracy.
By: Grey Area - 6th June 2004 at 11:18
Yet another stupid coment by all the do gooders out there.
Nice to hear such a rational calm and dispassionate argument coming from the Right of the house…… 😎
By: Geforce - 6th June 2004 at 11:14
In the post-modern world we don’t simply believe in ONE religion, be it or Judeo-Christian God or the Almighty Dollar. Philosophically I think making a difference between right and left is not needed, because we have to accept both are necessairy. Otherwise we’ll end anyway in a totallitariam regime, be it extreme right (nazism) or left (communism). We have several ‘religions’ now, the economy, christianity, ecologist, nationalism etc. The important thing is to keep them balanced, and therefor democracy is needed today, while people didn’t need it during the Middle ages for example.
By: Flood - 5th June 2004 at 22:47
Expect Hitler was kind to animals and Mussolini bought flowers for his mother regularly…
Still.
Flood.™
By: MINIDOH - 5th June 2004 at 22:42
Absolute cobbswabble. I am right wing and this certainly does NOT mean I am nasty. I just want all countries to look after their own. Besides, are you telling me that communism is good (its left wing, and its bloody evil). Yet another stupid coment by all the do gooders out there.
By: Hand87_5 - 5th June 2004 at 21:41
Personally I consider myself to be rightwing. I vote for a conservative party, not the socialists or the liberals. But I do understand that each party had its own use: liberals are important for economy, socialists to make sure people are not excluded and conservatives to respect values like family etc … Being rightwing does not make you a bad person though, and in a country like Belgium we need some rightwing opposition otherwise it would end in a socialist paradise, which we all know, is NOT a paradise. So this time I’m going to vote a rather right wing catholic (no extremists) party to balance it out. Pity is the party I want to vote for, are rightwingers, but they formed an alliance with a flemish nationalist party, and I consider myself to be a unionist. In Belgium, democracy is very complicated because we not only have parties based upon philosophies but also on culture and language. It has gone so far that even socialists here are becoming quite nationalist (no nazi’s :D). We’ll see next week, for the regional and communautarian elections.
More important than the ideological difference between parties is the difference between what we could consider a “liberal” state (like most democratic nation-states started back in the 19th century) and a social democracy (today). A social democracy should respect liberals (liberté), socialists (egalité) AND conservatives/catholics (fraternité).
Interesting …
By: Geforce - 5th June 2004 at 19:41
Personally I consider myself to be rightwing. I vote for a conservative party, not the socialists or the liberals. But I do understand that each party had its own use: liberals are important for economy, socialists to make sure people are not excluded and conservatives to respect values like family etc … Being rightwing does not make you a bad person though, and in a country like Belgium we need some rightwing opposition otherwise it would end in a socialist paradise, which we all know, is NOT a paradise. So this time I’m going to vote a rather right wing catholic (no extremists) party to balance it out. Pity is the party I want to vote for, are rightwingers, but they formed an alliance with a flemish nationalist party, and I consider myself to be a unionist. In Belgium, democracy is very complicated because we not only have parties based upon philosophies but also on culture and language. It has gone so far that even socialists here are becoming quite nationalist (no nazi’s :D). We’ll see next week, for the regional and communautarian elections.
More important than the ideological difference between parties is the difference between what we could consider a “liberal” state (like most democratic nation-states started back in the 19th century) and a social democracy (today). A social democracy should respect liberals (liberté), socialists (egalité) AND conservatives/catholics (fraternité).
By: mixtec - 5th June 2004 at 19:33
I consider myself liberal, but in this case I agree with right wingers. You just cant hold the publics hand and try to make them live responcibly. Some times you just have to let them fail and build some clinics to take care of the aftermath.
Sign In
June 5, 2004 at 12:03 pm