LSE Tories: "We'll only campaign against far left fascists"
- Thread starter Prince Rhyus
- Start date
Spion
I hear ya
it's becase the political compass is a flawed idea. State ownership of industry is something that has been carried out by all sorts of regimes from Mussolini to the Labour Party (see the recent bank bailouts). It has most often been a way of protecting industries for the benefit of capitalists and would be capitalists (except for the USSR, where it arose in a completely different way).
And the authoritarian/libertarian dichotomy is a silly and false one. The most libertarian system imaginable has to be authoritarian against those that would destroy it, unless it has political suicide as an acceptable doctrine
And the authoritarian/libertarian dichotomy is a silly and false one. The most libertarian system imaginable has to be authoritarian against those that would destroy it, unless it has political suicide as an acceptable doctrine
I wouldn't say it is "silly". I think it holds up pretty well, as a rule of thumb but obviously there will an area where there is an obvious barrier. I think most Libertarians would agree that the rule of law is responsible for acting as a barrier against those who would murder, steal etc. I believe one of the key tennets of say the LPUK is the rule of law. There is nothing preventing those in a Libertarian environment forming their own commune, sharing the proceeds of the labour with each other etc. as long as they do not force other to partake against their will. The law under the idea espoused by likes like the LPUK would also uphold your right to do that and live how you wish, something that just wouldn't happen under a Labour or Tory government based upon experience.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
Spion
I hear ya
Therein lies the contradiction. You can only protext (in this case your version of) libertarianism with the full force of the police and courts and prisons
That isn't necessarily my version of Libertarianism, but of course I udnerstand your point. Of course society to a large part creates the situations that result in crime. There is no reason to believe they could not be addressed under a Libertarian government. Maybe not all of them, but some at any rate.
The police and courts etc. are largely a byproduct of human society not being able to find utopia, and since I doubt we ever will they are a neccisary evil. However I do believe we could vastly reduce the need for them, in some cases with a change in attitude to things like dug legislation.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Are you callling fur dug licences tae be reintroduced? Because Ah dinna think dug owners wid go fur it.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
nationalising industries and interfering in people's businesses because you, as the state, want to insinuate yourself into every aspect of life, while not fundamentally changing the social structure and in fact entrenching the existing order deeper as part of your extreme reactionary conservatism isn't at all the same as actual socialist policies like the re-distribution of wealth and the like - the two are done for completely different purposes.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
It's very telling that the tories (along with most people) aren't arguing against the fash on their actual policies but on their history, what their views are on the holocaust, and the like. no attempt to engage with them on real economic issues, something which should be easy given that scratch the surface and you will find that these guys don't know wtf they're talking about. so why don't they?
The person quoted here - Michael Rock, the national chair of Conservative Future - is not at LSE. He was invited as one person on a panel discussion.
The only 'LSE Tory' quoted (Union Residences Officer and Conservative party member Helen Roberts) <quote>"...said she disagreed with Rock."<unquote>
I am not expressing support for Rock or the Conservatives - I'm just taking issue with the title of this thread - the LSE has never been a stronghold for young Conservatives, and the title is misleading in that regard.
Sorry the reasons might be different, but excuse my cynicism but I don't believe the results would be much different. I trust some social pious creep with his vision of how I should live my life as much as some pheasent munching tory.
Still not sure WHY people think government will be any different to big business anyway. The bastards that gravitate to a centralised business monoply, will gravitate towards a centralised government. With government though they still have the arms of the state to slap back anyone that disagrees with them, just as corporations who have bought out the state do.
Same reason the Labour left don't. They don't see the BNP as serious political opponents, more as a convenient boogeyman. It's okay for the Home Office to have thugs in uniform kicking down doors and dragging asylum seekers off to detention centres, because they're not fascists.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
and this is also true.
As a Conservative I think its irrelvant whether the BNP are considered left or right wing.
To my mind they are nasty and potentially very dangerous bastards who are conning a lot of people who are feeling, with some justification I feel, that they are being ignored by both the main stream political parties and who are being pigeonholed by a socially liberal welfare system as an underclass who should be isolated and ignored.
But the Conservative Party should be fighting the BNP alongside anybody else who values what this country should be about. Please dont get me wrong I find myself loathing the Labour Party and most lefties until I want to be sick but I would rather have them in power than the BNP.
The BNP are nasty, destructive, hateful, negative shit bags who are parasites breeding on the backs of genunine concerns that are not being addressed. The Tories should be looking to fight them at every opportunity and for me that includes things such as not putting up candidates in certain seats and urging its supporters to, if it would stop the BNP getting in, vote Labour which leaves a nasty taste in my mouth but by any means neccessary.
To my mind they are nasty and potentially very dangerous bastards who are conning a lot of people who are feeling, with some justification I feel, that they are being ignored by both the main stream political parties and who are being pigeonholed by a socially liberal welfare system as an underclass who should be isolated and ignored.
But the Conservative Party should be fighting the BNP alongside anybody else who values what this country should be about. Please dont get me wrong I find myself loathing the Labour Party and most lefties until I want to be sick but I would rather have them in power than the BNP.
The BNP are nasty, destructive, hateful, negative shit bags who are parasites breeding on the backs of genunine concerns that are not being addressed. The Tories should be looking to fight them at every opportunity and for me that includes things such as not putting up candidates in certain seats and urging its supporters to, if it would stop the BNP getting in, vote Labour which leaves a nasty taste in my mouth but by any means neccessary.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
There was a thread in the philosophy forum where the consensus seemed to be that the Nazi Party held no coherent political philosophy, dragooning in any beliefs that would help forward their demented views on race and volk. I suggested that we agree to leave Nazis and their creepy admirers off the political scale: an extension of Godwin's Law. Think I might e-mail my suggestion to this lot from the LSE.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I don't recall any such consensus or ever agreeing with suce crude apoltical nonsense myself.
I hate to confuse things further but what we mean by 'left' or 'right' wing is also a matter of semantics, for instance it was only since the Mid-Nineteenth centaury that it begin to be associated with communism and socialism. The Political compass is a vast improvement that if adopted more widely would raise the level of general understanding.
The original article is not very well done as common with student papers, for instance they refer to "The Conservatives NO2ID campaign". NO2ID is an independent organization, it's not the Conservatives campaign at all. Although Conservatives do support it.
You have to remember that some people on the Libertarian right associate planned economies with authoritarian governments and fascism. They make the error of thinking a free market will always create a free society, likewise those on the left fail to accept that having planned economy can cause governments to start planning and interfering in people’s private life’s (that can again result in fascism/totalitarianism).
History actually gives quite a few examples of this. Although in the sense that we associate right wing as meaning socially authoritarian obviously fascism is right wing. I don't think it's very helpful personally to think of fascism as either being a product of the left or the right.
Finally there is the confusion between fascism and totalitarianism. Fascism is a specifically tied to Italy, Spain and its even questionable the extent to which Nazism is the same type of fascism. People on the ‘right’ often think Fascism and Soviet Totalitarianism are interchangeable notions.
Basically both free market economies and planned economies can be very naughty
The original article is not very well done as common with student papers, for instance they refer to "The Conservatives NO2ID campaign". NO2ID is an independent organization, it's not the Conservatives campaign at all. Although Conservatives do support it.
You have to remember that some people on the Libertarian right associate planned economies with authoritarian governments and fascism. They make the error of thinking a free market will always create a free society, likewise those on the left fail to accept that having planned economy can cause governments to start planning and interfering in people’s private life’s (that can again result in fascism/totalitarianism).
History actually gives quite a few examples of this. Although in the sense that we associate right wing as meaning socially authoritarian obviously fascism is right wing. I don't think it's very helpful personally to think of fascism as either being a product of the left or the right.
Finally there is the confusion between fascism and totalitarianism. Fascism is a specifically tied to Italy, Spain and its even questionable the extent to which Nazism is the same type of fascism. People on the ‘right’ often think Fascism and Soviet Totalitarianism are interchangeable notions.
Basically both free market economies and planned economies can be very naughty
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
The thread petered out after a fine analysis of Nazi economics, and the suggestion that their over-riding priority was the volk. The Godwin's Law idea was mine.
I don't see what's crude or apolitical about leaving the Nazi Party off the traditional political scale (itself a crude projection of the seating arrangements of the Assemblée Nationale Constituante) if they lacked a coherent set of economic ideals.
The vast majority of the time, comparisons with the Nazis are used to slander opposing views, not to illustrate a point, so I'm still inclined towards Godwin's Law writ large.
I think the point you make is a good one, all political systems are different and unique in a sense. There is quite a strong argument that says Nazism is so unique it's not worth making comparrisons. But Nazi ideology is a hodge podge collections of different notions, the Volk, Race, Religion, Environment, Myth. In another sense though it's about the aethetisation of society the transformation of fashion, mass communication, advertising. It's the poltics of the tribe and the symbol, the mass super-ego and our need to belong replacing the pain of modernitiy.
Asking a Libertarian group to adopt a no platform stance is asking for trouble. They like the right for people to say things, some people think it's ok to squash that right if they don't like being said. Practically speaking the zealous attitude with which the BNP are hounded plays right into their hands. Allowing them to speak and then refuting their views with reason might be a better strategy for tackling their ideology.
Once you start banning people from speaking you start to go down a very slippery path, just look at the USSR ffs. That's where this Conservative is probably comming although sadly the turn of phrase was poor and that has opened up this debate over the semantics of the political terms we employ to try and model political behaviour.
Ironically it's probably very helpful for such a debate to be opened up.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Thus the wrecking ball of post-modernism
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
Very well put, and if there was a thread about the role of personality cults and tribalism in politics, a comparison with the Nazi Party could be valid. Jung had an interesting essay on the psychology of Nazism. That's probably the best sphere in which to debate those madmen.
If, however, we're debating along tradtional Right/Left lines, then comparisons are near-invariably smears. As has been said, the Conservative was probably trying to turn around the tired "Nazis are right-wing" smear-by-association, but maybe he was also bringing in no-platform, as you say, he didn't put his point over very well at all, whatever it was.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
That;'s right, not a product of right-wing politics under the pressure of modernisation at all. No, some weirdo esoteric shit. And def not from the right.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
My view is that if you analyse the DAP's original "25 Point Programme" (retained by the NSDAP) as to whether they're "nationalist" or "socialist" a certain pattern is revealed:
2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.(nationalist)
3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the sustenance of our people, and colonization for our surplus population.(nationalist)
4. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.(nationalist and "racist")
5. Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest, and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.(nationalist)
6. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.(nationalist and "racist")
7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the members of foreign nations (non-citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.(nationalist and "racist")
8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who have immigrated to Germany since the [2 August 1914], be forced immediately to leave the Reich.(nationalist and "racist")
9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.(socialist)
10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality...(socialist)
...but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:
11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.
(socialist)
12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.(socialist)
13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts). (socialist)
14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.(socialist)
15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.(socialist)
16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.(reformist)
17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land. (socialist)
18. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.(
19. We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order.(nationalist)
20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.(nationalist)
21. The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.(quasi-socialist with authoritarian overtones)
22. We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army.(nationalist)
23. We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that: a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race: b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language: c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands.(nationalist)
24. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: The good of the state before the good of the individual.(nationalist)
25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the various states of the confederation. The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set forth above without consideration.(nationalist)
How many of those points that I've labelled "socialist" actually survived the first couple of years of Nazi dictatorship (or in fact even got legislated), compared to those I've labelled "nationalist" or similar?
I think that such an analysis, as simplistic and hurried as it is, illustrates the degree to which Nazism in government was committed to socialism in comparison to it's commitment to nationalism.
Twenty-Five Point Programme of the Nazi Party
1. We demand the unification of all Germans in the Greater Germany on the basis of the right of self-determination of people. (nationalist)2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the peace treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.(nationalist)
3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the sustenance of our people, and colonization for our surplus population.(nationalist)
4. Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently no Jew can be a member of the race.(nationalist and "racist")
5. Whoever has no citizenship is to be able to live in Germany only as a guest, and must be under the authority of legislation for foreigners.(nationalist)
6. The right to determine matters concerning administration and law belongs only to the citizen. Therefore we demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county or municipality, be filled only by citizens. We combat the corrupting parliamentary economy, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.(nationalist and "racist")
7. We demand that the state be charged first with providing the opportunity for a livelihood and way of life for the citizens. If it is impossible to sustain the total population of the State, then the members of foreign nations (non-citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.(nationalist and "racist")
8. Any further immigration of non-citizens is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who have immigrated to Germany since the [2 August 1914], be forced immediately to leave the Reich.(nationalist and "racist")
9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.(socialist)
10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the interests of the universality...(socialist)
...but must have its result within the framework of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:
11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.
(socialist)
12. In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.(socialist)
13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous) associated industries (trusts). (socialist)
14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.(socialist)
15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.(socialist)
16. We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.(reformist)
17. We demand a land reform suitable to our needs, provision of a law for the free expropriation of land for the purposes of public utility, abolition of taxes on land and prevention of all speculation in land. (socialist)
18. We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.(
19. We demand substitution of a German common law in place of the Roman Law serving a materialistic world-order.(nationalist)
20. The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession.(nationalist)
21. The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.(quasi-socialist with authoritarian overtones)
22. We demand abolition of the mercenary troops and formation of a national army.(nationalist)
23. We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that: a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race: b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language: c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands.(nationalist)
24. We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: The good of the state before the good of the individual.(nationalist)
25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in general. The forming of state and profession chambers for the execution of the laws made by the Reich within the various states of the confederation. The leaders of the Party promise, if necessary by sacrificing their own lives, to support by the execution of the points set forth above without consideration.(nationalist)
* * * * * * *
How many of those points that I've labelled "socialist" actually survived the first couple of years of Nazi dictatorship (or in fact even got legislated), compared to those I've labelled "nationalist" or similar?
I think that such an analysis, as simplistic and hurried as it is, illustrates the degree to which Nazism in government was committed to socialism in comparison to it's commitment to nationalism.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
"Were the Nazi Party right-wing" and "were the Nazi Party a product of right-wing policies" are seperate issues. No "weirdo esoteric shit" necessary to say that.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No, they're directly connected issues.
(Still you miss the point though.)
(Still you miss the point though.)
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
What point? I've yet to see any evidence that Nazism held a coherent economic philosophy, besides building autobahns and starting wars to fuel a war economy, let alone that Nazism was inherently "right-wing" (or "left-wing" for that matter). They were nationalists and nose-measurers obsessed with racial pedigree, not economic theorists.
The circumstances of its creation don't alter the Nazi Party's political incoherence. Although talking of those circumstances, I'm not sure that the political and economic implosion of the Weimar Republic was a product of right-wing politics either. But that's by the by.
The circumstances of its creation don't alter the Nazi Party's political incoherence. Although talking of those circumstances, I'm not sure that the political and economic implosion of the Weimar Republic was a product of right-wing politics either. But that's by the by.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Then i suggest that you read some books, Economy and class structure of German fascism by Alfred Sohn-Rethel for starters, or any on of the many many books on just this subject.
The last para is just scrabbling oddness. Oh no, how could fascism possibly have developed out of right wing politics, as i'm a right winger. Until you deal with it bit better than thios you'll be having thios reaction over and over.
Azrael
circling Airstrip One
You're missing my point: it doesn't matter whether fascism developed from "right-wing" politics. Maybe it did. By that logic communism developed from "right-wing" politics as well. All that says is that "right-wing politics, in the wrong circumstances, can lead to the breakdown of civil society. In those circumstances a band of insane volkists may take power. Or they may not, should none be available, and the national culture not be predisposed to their line.
That's distinct from saying that Nazism is inherently right-wing, and speaks of some dark heart in the political Right. (Whatever that is: as I've frequently said, I find the Left/Right framework of limited usefulness.)
What if we do agree that Nazism is right-wing? Someone just says "Well Stalin was just as bad," and we begin the even more tedious debate about whether the Soviet Union was left-wing or not.
As for my alledged motive of tribal loyalty to right-wing politics, Burkean conservatism has precisely nothing to do with worshippers of Nordic supermen, so therein lies oddness.
That's distinct from saying that Nazism is inherently right-wing, and speaks of some dark heart in the political Right. (Whatever that is: as I've frequently said, I find the Left/Right framework of limited usefulness.)
What if we do agree that Nazism is right-wing? Someone just says "Well Stalin was just as bad," and we begin the even more tedious debate about whether the Soviet Union was left-wing or not.
As for my alledged motive of tribal loyalty to right-wing politics, Burkean conservatism has precisely nothing to do with worshippers of Nordic supermen, so therein lies oddness.
Similar threads
