The Reform Party and the UK’s lurch towards fascism

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #32683
    David9694

    I posted an earlier version of this a while back – inspired to do update following THAT discussion about all things ULEZ. 

    The “manifesto”, in terms of transport, only mentions stopping HS2, but there’s plenty on the usual right-wing obsessions: Brexit, immigration, veterans and climate change.  I had another look because I worry about the ongoing decline of the two main political parties. 

    If the Cons stay wedded to Brexit, then we will go into the next GE with all the widespread impoverishment Brexit has ushered in – not helped by Covid, Putin, etc. People generally vote according to their pockets.  I don’t get Labour’s current position on Europe either, but let’s see how that evolves, and even the Cons may also evolve, or even pivot, but time is already running out for them.

    Several roads now lead to the horrors of a further lurch to the right in this country.  Let’s hope Labour get the GE landslide the polls are predicting – but we’re still at least a year out from the real campaigning beginning. 

    A cycling angle? With the Reform Party and its ilk, Facebook Steve and Nextdoor Dave attain real political influence. It’s not spelt out in the manifesto, but you can see where this is probably heading and what it is likely to mean for cycling.  You can bet that this lot are very much “on the side of hard working drivers” etc. 

    As you all know, Dave’s going to “sort the traffic” and no doubt show them lazy planners how it’s done: Steve thinks the Council are corrupt, the police blinkered and is, if he can fit it in to his busy schedule he’s going to “teach them Lycra’s a thing or two.” It won’t concern him that his Mondeo is 3 months out of MoT or that Mrs Steve sometimes drives the kids in it uninsured. 

    As vulnerable road users, vulnerable people, we rely a great deal on the rule of law for protection. The rule of law means that we understand what the laws are, they are in general fair, and how they are applied and to whom is even-handed and consistent. 

    The fascist position is broadly the opposite – it’s all off-the-cuff to support today’s particular agenda – that’s why the Iain Duncan-Smith “happy to see ULEZ infra vandalised” comment is, as an example, so very worrying.  In the Conservatives, here is a party happy to send signals to enable the mob to attack RNLI stations, beat up immigrants, shout at teachers, doctors etc. 

    This right-wing stuff works by allowing/enabling significant privileged groups to to think of themselves as the downtrodden underdog and here is a way to fight back.  The pro Brexit campaign played on people’s ignorance, fears and prejudices exactly as this does. 

    It’s all about freedom, innit, less regulation, less tax burden, and damn the climate.  There’s more polar bears now, so it’s fine.  Let’s have open-cast coal mining, lithium mining and fracking. The section on climate change stumbles around like a Friday night drunk, trying to explain he wasn’t being racist to the barman – a denier position emerges, unsurprisingly.

    In places, the mask really slips: “We must keep divisive woke ideologies such as Critical Race Theory (CRT) and gender ideology out of the classroom.” – to be honest, I don’t even know what those two are.

    The standard enemies are put up – the civil service, the BBC.  Amid all the thrust and parry, there’s nothing  about making a better, more inclusive and cohesive world to live in; arts, sports and culture don’t feature in this barstool view of the world: a dullard’s grim vision.

    Don’t be a member of the wrong sort of minority would be my advice, should any of this come to pass. 
     

    https://www.reformparty.uk/reformisessential

Viewing 15 replies - 871 through 885 (of 891 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #1016389
    0
    Rich_cb

    You don’t just reserve your
    You don’t just reserve your ire for the people in power though.

    You’ve claimed in this thread that anyone who supports the government is “part of the problem”.

    Every time an outgroup has been persecuted in history those doing the persecution have been able to justify it to themselves.

    History’s great crimes were enthusiastically cheered by people just like us, who justified the persecutions in the exact same way we justify our own hatred.

    #1016387
    0
    chrisonabike

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    If you think the current Conservative party are far right then you really need to pick up a history book and figure out what that phrase actually means.

    You’re tall! No, you’re short!

    All relative but yes by our “layman’s definitions” not “far right” (yet – there’s always time!).

    I think the radical economic policies of Truss / Kwarteng and the “deport ’em” headline policy have likely triggered some pattern matching.

    As usual however you’ve reminded me – we need more axes!

    What about 3 this time?

    #1016385
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Hirsute wrote:

    Hirsute wrote:
    Are organised crime gangs or people traffickers an outgroup? So if I hate them, I’m somehow wrong. Seems you can just say ‘oh you are making them an outgroup’ no matter what this group do, say or endorse. There’s no line to cross.

    Exactly – Rich_cb is trying to act like Tories are the victims here. It’s a common right-wing ploy to go on the defensive and accuse others of doing what they themselves are doing.

    It’s like in the U.S. where right wing politicians accuse transgendered people of abusing children, though the vast majority of child abuse is carried out by non-transgendered people in positions of power (e.g. police, clergy, coaches etc).

    #1016383
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    It’s beyond you because you don’t want to admit that you are the same as the people who you hate. Out groups haven’t always been defined by unalterable characteristics. The Kulaks in the Soviet Union were an out group and were massacred. They were largely just ordinary people who happened to be ‘bourgeois’. Communists and Socialists were an out group in McCarthy era America. Socialism/communism is a political choice. The persecution of both those groups was still wrong. What happened to the Kulaks was on a par with any cruelty meted out to any group. As a fun little example of how similar you are to those that you really hate consider which unsavoury groups in history would have said the following about their chosen out group:
    HawkinsPeter wrote:
    If they weren’t so hell-bent on sleaze, cruelty and self-serving greed, then they wouldn’t be so hated.

    The point that you are deliberately ignoring is that the people in power are not being persecuted and they’re certainly not having their children illegally locked up in hotels: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/01/home-office-defies-high-court-by-placing-100-asylum-seeker-children-in-hotels

    #1016381
    0
    Hirsute

    Are organised crime gangs or
    Are organised crime gangs or people traffickers an outgroup?
    So if I hate them, I’m somehow wrong.

    Seems you can just say ‘oh you are making them an outgroup’ no matter what this group do, say or endorse. There’s no line to cross.

    #1016379
    0
    chrisonabike

    Um – isn’t it a question of

    Um – isn’t it a question of degree and what you do with that?  The degree to which people follow human traits (or encourage them in others) – and what that leads to – is quite important!  (No shortage of historical examples).

    You’re quite right, it’s not specifically party political – and some of these posts are neatly self-contradicting.

    However I think it’s fair to ask at any given point are there any groups especially indulging in this – or encouraging it in others as a means to an end?

    #1016377
    0
    Rich_cb

    It’s beyond you because you
    It’s beyond you because you don’t want to admit that you are the same as the people who you hate.

    Out groups haven’t always been defined by unalterable characteristics. The Kulaks in the Soviet Union were an out group and were massacred. They were largely just ordinary people who happened to be ‘bourgeois’. Communists and Socialists were an out group in McCarthy era America. Socialism/communism is a political choice. The persecution of both those groups was still wrong. What happened to the Kulaks was on a par with any cruelty meted out to any group.

    As a fun little example of how similar you are to those that you really hate consider which unsavoury groups in history would have said the following about their chosen out group:

    HawkinsPeter wrote:

    If they weren’t so hell-bent on sleaze, cruelty and self-serving greed, then they wouldn’t be so hated.

    #1016375
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    I’m not missing the point. You are. Throughout human history people have wanted an outgroup to hate. They have justified why they hate that outgroup in various different ways but ultimately it’s the same desire to hate. I’m sure you think your particular out groups are different and that your particular motivations are different. They’re not.

    If they weren’t so hell-bent on sleaze, cruelty and self-serving greed, then they wouldn’t be so hated. It’s precisely their destruction of so much of this country that has to be stopped. As soon as the Tories are out of power, there’s not going to be any persistent campaign to hate them, though history will not be kind to their rampant abuse of power and environmental destruction.

    To be honest, I’m sick of your lies when you attempt to justify the unjustifiable. How you can possibly think that persecution of refugees is any way comparable to people complaining about the morally unjustifiable cruelty of the rich, entitled Tories is beyond me.

    #1016373
    0
    Rich_cb

    If you think the current
    If you think the current Conservative party are far right then you really need to pick up a history book and figure out what that phrase actually means.

    #1016371
    0
    Rich_cb

    I’m not missing the point.
    I’m not missing the point. You are.

    Throughout human history people have wanted an outgroup to hate. They have justified why they hate that outgroup in various different ways but ultimately it’s the same desire to hate.

    I’m sure you think your particular out groups are different and that your particular motivations are different.

    They’re not.

    #1016369
    0
    Rich_cb

    Simon E wrote:

    Simon E wrote:
    They’re not an out-group…

    selfish, amoral, lying, moneylaundering, lawbreaking, shit-stirring pro-fascist, racist and deeply corrupt grifter c**ts

    I detest the Conservative governments of the last 13 years. I hate … every rotten thing they stand for, more than anything else I can remember.

    Well that just completely disproved my point…

    #1016365
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    So the correct outgroup to demonise is Conservatives? People like to put other people in outgroups, that’s always been the case. The left like to think that placing conservatives in an outgroup is somehow different. It isn’t, it’s the exact same phenomenon with the exact same ugly sentiment underlying it. If it wasn’t for ‘group X’ then life in this country would be so much better…

    You’re missing the point.

    When people put others into an out-group, it’s because of who they are (e.g. black, gay, squirrel fancier etc.)  or the situation they find themselves in (e.g. homeless, asylum seekers, pregnant teen etc). Our complaints about the Tories is because of what they do and what they have done.

    There’s certainly people who identify as Conservative and are aghast at how the government is behaving, but if you support the current government and their policies, then you are part of the problem.

    #1016367
    0
    Simon E

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    So the correct outgroup to demonise is Conservatives?
    In the present circumstances I’d say yes. Though not demonise but definitely blame for many of the deliberately harmful decisions made to ensure that the everyday life for most of the population of the UK have been made considerably worse by the government that has been unashamedly abusing its power and influence continuously since 2010. They’re not an out-group, they are just happy to make enemies along with vast amounts of money.

    Being a diehard Tory voter, you may not like the idea but I’m past caring about that, just like you don’t care about clean water, decent public services, addressing our impact on climate change, treating non-white people, foreign-born people, disabled people and many more minority groups as fellow human beings and with a basic level of respect.

    You are happy to keep voting for and supporting those selfish, amoral, lying, moneylaundering, lawbreaking, shit-stirring pro-fascist, racist and deeply corrupt grifter c**ts. To paraphrase an old truism, you are judged by the people you vote for.

    I detest the Conservative governments of the last 13 years. I hate all the harm they’ve done and every rotten thing they stand for, more than anything else I can remember.

    #1016363
    0
    Cugel

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    So the correct outgroup to demonise is Conservatives? People like to put other people in outgroups, that’s always been the case. The left like to think that placing conservatives in an outgroup is somehow different. It isn’t, it’s the exact same phenomenon with the exact same ugly sentiment underlying it. If it wasn’t for ‘group X’ then life in this country would be so much better…

    The Conservative Party, especially the far right version we have nowadays, have always been the very innest of in-groups. They’re quintissentially The Establishment and, just latley, The New Aristocracy. They have far, far more power and influence than any other group in our society and have suborned many previously neutral institutions such as the BBC, the police and a whole host of other infrastructure services that used to be public services but are now private profit makers serving just a few.

    The problem with what’s often called “the right” but is actually better named as “the totalitarians” is that they love certitude, loyalty, a binary view of everything as black or white, good or bad, them or us, true or false, etc.. They are intolerant of anything not approved by their dogma, whatever it might be.

    The dogmas are many and various but all have the aspect of intolerance with an associated avid desire to condemn and punish that which is different from the dogma specifications. They can be “left wing” as well as “right wing” although there are quite a few left wing political traditions (socialists) that are tolerant but not so many of the right that are so. (Certain kinds of benign monarchies, such as that of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, are exceptions to the right>tight>totalitarian tendency).

    *******

    Those of us who prefer tolerance have this dilemma, identified by may political theorists and philosophers, as in Popper’s “Paradox of tolerance”:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

    If the tolerance-inclined tolerate totalitarians, tolerance as a political and social option disappears to be replaced by some totalitarian alternative: communist, fascist, theocracy, absolute monarchy, kleptocracy, military dictatorship or whatever.

    Tighty righties inclined to condemn all who are not identical to themselves have to be resisted somehow. Give them enough power and any resistance to them becomes futile then impossible.

    Tighty righties also need to grasp (although they really struggle with the notion) that opposition to, and criticism of, their often highly illogical and damaging dogmas is not intolerance but only opposition and criticism, a normal dialogue of any tolerant and open society in which a true politics (compromises arranged between competing and different interests) are arranged and ordered via resilient and dynamic shared institutions and infrastructures that are argued about and changed to adapt to new circumstances, as needed by the public at large – everyone, not just a tiny favoured class of new aristo businesses and shareholders.

    It’s the simple stuff of modern democratic politics.  But not liked by dogmatic folk who crave Truth & Certainty about all things, to the point that they’ll warp reality to get them, no matter how much damage they do.

    #1016361
    0
    Rich_cb

    You’ve missed the point there
    You’ve missed the point there.

Viewing 15 replies - 871 through 885 (of 891 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.