The biggest mistakes the British left made....

[likesfish]

People in democracy shocker.

unfortunatly if you get the the users of an unemployed centre onside by being distant quoting obscure russians and when its not going your way using points of order.
what hope have you of being relevant to the rest of uk society

 

[Proper Tidy]

unfortunatly if you get the the users of an unemployed centre onside by being distant quoting obscure russians and when its not going your way using points of order.
what hope have you of being relevant to the rest of uk society

Nobody tends to go around quoting obscure russians to people though.

 

[ericjarvis]

What message is it then?

On the assumption that you genuinely didn't get it and aren't just dicking around playing stupid.

My contention is that the death penalty can be seen as the state sanctioning the taking of life as a punishment for the most severe offences. However we do not live in a homogenous society where absolutely everyone shares identical morals and values. So one thing the existence of the death penalty does is to imply state support for the moral acceptability of killing those who are seen as having transgressed particularly seriously. Which unintentionally implies support for things like revenge attacks by street gangs, the killing of police informers, and the various forms of perverse honour killing, amongst those who see other offences as being more serious than murder.

If everyone agreed that life was more important than honour, respect, loyalty etc, then there would be no problem. However that isn't even the position of the majority of British people, so the message sent by the use of the death penalty is inevitably more complex than is intended.

 

[Proper Tidy]

On the assumption that you genuinely didn't get it and aren't just dicking around playing stupid.

My contention is that the death penalty can be seen as the state sanctioning the taking of life as a punishment for the most severe offences. However we do not live in a homogenous society where absolutely everyone shares identical morals and values. So one thing the existence of the death penalty does is to imply state support for the moral acceptability of killing those who are seen as having transgressed particularly seriously. Which unintentionally implies support for things like revenge attacks by street gangs, the killing of police informers, and the various forms of perverse honour killing, amongst those who see other offences as being more serious than murder.

If everyone agreed that life was more important than honour, respect, loyalty etc, then there would be no problem. However that isn't even the position of the majority of British people, so the message sent by the use of the death penalty is inevitably more complex than is intended.

And I already said some posts ago that doesn't things like war and shit completely undermine your point? We already have 'legitimate' killings.

 

[likesfish]

Nobody tends to go around quoting obscure russians to people though.

bloke I met did took awhile to realise he was a fucking idiot.
was very keen though probably did more damage to the left with his enthusiasim.
the stupid and industrious always need watching

 

[ViolentPanda]

And I already said some posts ago that doesn't things like war and shit completely undermine your point? We already have 'legitimate' killings.

It's not the same thing, though. The deaths caused by war are only ever legitimated via partisan arguments (either prior to, during or after the killing occurs), execution is the legislatively-endorsed and licenced killing of individuals by the state, generally pour encourage les autres ( like that works!).

 

[LLETSA]

It's not the same thing, though. The deaths caused by war are only ever legitimated via partisan arguments (either prior to, during or after the killing occurs), execution is the legislatively-endorsed and licenced killing of individuals by the state, generally pour encourage les autres ( like that works!).

EJ's argument is undermined by the fact that we actually had fewer gangland killings, murders of police informers etc etc, when we did have state sanctioned killing via the death penalty. It's also undermined by the fact that societies have existed where the death penalty existed and there were no gangland killings at all, and virtually no murders of the many police informers. This was the situation in the former USSR and its satellites. I'm not saying that they were desirable societies; I'm merely stating the truth of the matter, which is that EJ's argument is a gross over-simplification.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

That is shit logic. 'Stating the truth of the matter'? lol

 

[LLETSA]

That is shit logic. 'Stating the truth of the matter'? lol

You're right-everybody knows that the truth of the matter is that what's actually happened in the past is what your personal and political preferences make you want to have happened.

 

[ViolentPanda]

EJ's argument is undermined by the fact that we actually had fewer gangland killings, murders of police informers etc etc, when we did have state sanctioned killing via the death penalty.

Not really comparable, though.

I'm sure that if you ponder a while, you'll realise that comparing criminal and legal culture 40+ years ago with criminal and legal culture now is pointless. Any assessment of a move toward a reinstated death penalty has to be based on present fact and circumstance, not on a whimsical assessment of past efficacy.

It's also undermined by the fact that societies have existed where the death penalty existed and there were no gangland killings at all, and virtually no murders of the many police informers. This was the situation in the former USSR and its satellites.

The stats may tell us that there were no gangland killings, but what makes them any more trustworthy than any other statistics compiled by states?
I'd also hazard a guess that, in common with many authoritarian states, the former Soviet states wouldn't be over-enthusiastic about reporting the occurrence of crimes more reflective of a capitalist regime.

I'm not saying that they were desirable societies; I'm merely stating the truth of the matter, which is that EJ's argument is a gross over-simplification.

All arguments that are confined to a handful of paragraphs tend to be grossly simplified. You're hardly stating an eternal verity with your "truth of the matter", are you?

 

[LLETSA]

Not really comparable, though.

I'm sure that if you ponder a while, you'll realise that comparing criminal and legal culture 40+ years ago with criminal and legal culture now is pointless. Any assessment of a move toward a reinstated death penalty has to be based on present fact and circumstance, not on a whimsical assessment of past efficacy.



The stats may tell us that there were no gangland killings, but what makes them any more trustworthy than any other statistics compiled by states?
I'd also hazard a guess that, in common with many authoritarian states, the former Soviet states wouldn't be over-enthusiastic about reporting the occurrence of crimes more reflective of a capitalist regime.



All arguments that are confined to a handful of paragraphs tend to be grossly simplified. You're hardly stating an eternal verity with your "truth of the matter", are you?

As I've pointed out throughout this thread, I'm not comparing 'criminal and legal culture' (whatever that may be) nowadays and in the past. All I'm doing is staing what appears to be the case-that murder was less prevalent, as was violence generally and gangland culture etc-when the death penalty existed. Everybody is free to argue about the reasons for this to their hearts' contents. It isn't even the case that I'm arguing for the death penalty, as it seemed necessary to point out above for the benefit of the excitable and the slow witted: the subject isn't worth getting all that excited about,if only because as long as the present economic and social system and the dominant system of values holds, there is no chance whatsoever of it being reintroduced. (When those systems break down somewhere along the line, it is certain to be reintroduced almost everywhere, however. But for now we can rest easy.)

Any account of life in the formerly Communist-ruled countries, even those most highly critical of them, will tell you that although organised crime existed, it generally took the form of almost fully open (although officially denied) corruption at state and local government level. Even the famed prison gangs and criminal clans of the USSR couldn't operate without state connivance. And the state could have wiped them out at a moments notice. These gangs did not take whatever violent freuds they may have had to the streets. Nobody was ever seen carrying guns in those countries except police, soldiers and other arms of state security. Shootings by private indiviuals were almost unheard of. Perhaps these are the advantages of a police state. So, too, is it widely acknowledged that those societies had relatively little violent crime. I can personally vouch for the fact that even as late as 1991 (when the former USSR could in no way still be seriously described as a police state), the streets of Moscow were safer at night than those of Manchester.

 

[LLETSA]

It's not the same thing, though. The deaths caused by war are only ever legitimated via partisan arguments (either prior to, during or after the killing occurs), execution is the legislatively-endorsed and licenced killing of individuals by the state, generally pour encourage les autres ( like that works!).

The point is that war is more or less universally acknowledged as inevitable. War usually involves widespread and state-sanctioned killing. It doesn't have to be written in any statute books.

 

[flicy]

Biggest mistake, the list by their own admission is too long. They made mistakes on the ecconomy, they made mistakes on immigration, they admit they should have done more on benefit reform,admit they should have regulated the banks better, admit they should have tackled our growing deficit earlier. Admit they were wrong to go into Iraq. Got it wrong on 24 hour drinking. Although I haven't heard them admit it yet they gave away far to much power to Europe. Spent billions on the NHS with little to show for it. Burdened the police with so much paper work that they have no time to keep law & order yet pay themselves drastically more. Likewise council workers who's wages & pensions have gone through the ceiling along with our council tax bills, while we get less & less in service for our money. It would be hard to find something they didn't make a CU of, not to mention our entire ecconomy which we will all be paying for, for many years to come in lower living standards.

 

[stethoscope]

Bless, did you think of that all by yourself?

 

[Blagsta]

Biggest mistake, the list by their own admission is too long. They made mistakes on the ecconomy, they made mistakes on immigration, they admit they should have done more on benefit reform,admit they should have regulated the banks better, admit they should have tackled our growing deficit earlier. Admit they were wrong to go into Iraq. Got it wrong on 24 hour drinking. Although I haven't heard them admit it yet they gave away far to much power to Europe. Spent billions on the NHS with little to show for it. Burdened the police with so much paper work that they have no time to keep law & order yet pay themselves drastically more. Likewise council workers who's wages & pensions have gone through the ceiling along with our council tax bills, while we get less & less in service for our money. It would be hard to find something they didn't make a CU of, not to mention our entire ecconomy which we will all be paying for, for many years to come in lower living standards.

Sorry, who did all this?

 

[flicy]

Pc has not stopped people who enjoy being cruel continuing to be so, or made people who do not more so. It just causes people who make innocent remarks with no intent to offend have their careers destroyed by a witch hunt conducted by lefty witch finder generals who would burn such innocents at the stake if they could. It has destroyed freedom of speech, The British sense of humour, & the great British stiff upper lip & turned us into a bunch of over emotional poor little me victims, who need psychiatric treatment if someone utters a word of criticism at them. All it has achieved is an emperor's coat culture where people are afraid to speak their minds but it dosn't change what they think.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

"Why shouldn't I be allowed to say 'wog'?"

 

[Blagsta]

Pc has not stopped people who enjoy being cruel continuing to be so, or made people who do not more so. It just causes people who make innocent remarks with no intent to offend have their careers destroyed by a witch hunt conducted by lefty witch finder generals who would burn such innocents at the stake if they could. It has destroyed freedom of speech, The British sense of humour, & the great British stiff upper lip & turned us into a bunch of over emotional poor little me victims, who need psychiatric treatment if someone utters a word of criticism at them. All it has achieved is an emperor's coat culture where people are afraid to speak their minds but it dosn't change what they think.

Who did all this exactly?

 

[Red Cat]

Them.

 

[stethoscope]

Pc has not stopped people who enjoy being cruel continuing to be so, or made people who do not more so. It just causes people who make innocent remarks with no intent to offend have their careers destroyed by a witch hunt conducted by lefty witch finder generals who would burn such innocents at the stake if they could. It has destroyed freedom of speech, The British sense of humour, & the great British stiff upper lip & turned us into a bunch of over emotional poor little me victims, who need psychiatric treatment if someone utters a word of criticism at them. All it has achieved is an emperor's coat culture where people are afraid to speak their minds but it dosn't change what they think.

Quick descent into 'PC gawn mad' territory!

I wouldn't say people are afraid to speak their minds - I think you're a cunt and am happy to let you know it.

 

[stethoscope]

Are 'them' the blackz, the wimminz, the muslimz, the gayz, flicy?

 

[stethoscope]

Also flicy, if you'd be so kind, perhaps you'd return to your Human Rights Act thread, as you appear to have abandoned it - surely you'll be able to back up your huff and puff with some substance? Otherwise, you'll just come across as a bit of a fly-by twat.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Biggest mistake, the list by their own admission is too long. They made mistakes on the ecconomy, they made mistakes on immigration, they admit they should have done more on benefit reform,admit they should have regulated the banks better, admit they should have tackled our growing deficit earlier. Admit they were wrong to go into Iraq. Got it wrong on 24 hour drinking. Although I haven't heard them admit it yet they gave away far to much power to Europe. Spent billions on the NHS with little to show for it. Burdened the police with so much paper work that they have no time to keep law & order yet pay themselves drastically more. Likewise council workers who's wages & pensions have gone through the ceiling along with our council tax bills, while we get less & less in service for our money. It would be hard to find something they didn't make a CU of, not to mention our entire ecconomy which we will all be paying for, for many years to come in lower living standards.

That's a tidy little rant and I am sure it is better out than in. However it has nothing to do with the 'British Left'.

It is true that the left founded the NHS but the increased costs were largely as a result of outsourcing, privatising and building new hospitals with PFI funding. That change was started by the right wing Thatcher, and continued by her political offspring the right wing Blair. The 'left' had no influence on the New Labour governments at any stage.

 

[likesfish]

the left were still trying to justify the USSR long after anyone sane had realized whatever it was it was'nt the answer.
Plus unilateral disarmant that was a stupid policy and deeply unpopular

 

[Proper Tidy]

It has destroyed freedom of speech, The British sense of humour, & the great British stiff upper lip

Bless

 

[Proper Tidy]

the left were still trying to justify the USSR long after anyone sane had realized whatever it was it was'nt the answer.

I'm sure you mean all this but your head is full of strawmen.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

the left were still trying to justify the USSR long after anyone sane had realized whatever it was it was'nt the answer.
Plus unilateral disarmant that was a stupid policy and deeply unpopular

I think unilateral disarmament is a good idea. Remember it is only the nuclear weapons that will be 'disarmed'. We could never use them and with the money saved we could have better equipped conventional forces.

 

[newbie]

funny thread. Quite interesting, though in some ways more for what hasn't been said than what has.

We've heard about the effects of smack, crack, poverty, inequality and class, youth centres, mental health and dialectics but no-one has got round to mentioning the biggest driver of the lot. At least in terms of victim perception and the resulting fear.

Alcohol.

Why is that?

 

[likesfish]

back in the coldwar it made no sense .
the old ussr was a boot stamping on peoples faces forever anyone who defend it is an enemy of humanity

 

[Proper Tidy]

I agree, alcohol probably is the biggest mistake of the left.