Thursday, May 13, 2010

Nihilism and not learning the lessons

What is it about socialists that they cannot come to terms with defeat in the polls? You check around various leftist blogs, even the Guardian CiF for commentary of the Labour meltdown and they more or less come up with the same tired old diatribes and nihilism when it comes to a change of government.

Here.
When it comes down to it, we don’t give a flyer what is in anybody’s manifesto. We are not stupid enough to believe that politicians will implement their stated policies anyway.
No. Our only goal is to keep the Conservatives out. There are no other considerations, nothing else to factor into the equation. It really is that simple.
It's defining yourself by what you oppose, not what you want to do, in part it's because the public tend eventually to refute socialism in the polls after the cost becomes apparent, this usually leads to socialists aligning themselves to any group who they see as a possible counter to the Tories. There are of course some on the right who do that too, you can often see their comments in ConHome where they blamed UKIP because Cameron was stupid enough to believe he didn't need to take what the core supporters wanted into consideration enough and hence ended up in a hung parliament, rather than an overwhelming majority against one of the worst lead governments in living memory. In effect it's a form of tribalism along the lines of my party/country/group right or wrong and with socialists being internationalist communitarian's (mostly) they have a tendency to do group think on a far larger scale and define their thoughts by what they hate.

They still bang on about diversity and multiculturalism and how the government should do things despite the rejection of much of this way of doing things by the electorate.

Here.
Diverse, plural, where different points of view find a way to work together."
This cabinet, diverse? With less than 14% women? Spain manages 53%, Germany 37%. Plural? With not a single minority ethnic MP? A new kind of politics? When two thirds of the top table went to private school – three each to Eton and Westminster – compared with 7% of the population?
 Clearly to the average lefty diverse has a completely different meaning to the average person on the street, you don't have to be a woman to accept that if women have different needs and priorities from government, you don't need to be a woman to apply them, ditto Muslims, Blacks, Gay etc. It was diversity where these groups or rather political extremists in these groups got power from the government and proceeded to use this to elevate their particular group over and above the mainstream, instead of equality and diversity we ended up with priority and ghettoism where these groups drew apart and discriminated against others rather than tolerated them, which was rather supposed to be the point of equality and diversity.

The left really needs to redefine their message away from hate and what they oppose, then again, considering what they usually offer when in power being economic mismanagement, public service growth, discrimination against the majority in favour of minorities, perhaps even an effort not to pick the pockets of the workers to pay for those who don't, though that's asking a bit much as they never seem to grasp that it isn't their money.

Still it could be a long, long while before they get into a position to do so much harm again, but peoples memories are short, the left remind them of Thatcher, yet the people forget why she came about and what she faced.

Perhaps the socialists will never grow up.

5 annotations:

Brian, follower of Deornoth said...

"to accept that women have different needs and priorities from government, ditto Muslims, Blacks, Gay etc"

Why do these groups have different needs and priories from government?

Quiet_Man said...

Bit of a typo, was meant to read that if women have differing needs from government then you don't necessarily need a woman in place to apply them.

John R said...

"Perhaps the socialists will never grow up"

It would appear from the comments you quote that socialism is some sort of arrested (political) development. So I doubt if they'll ever grow up.

James Higham said...

There are no other considerations, nothing else to factor into the equation. It really is that simple.

Keeping out progress, freedom and the people's voice, supporting Statism - well done, lefties.

Quiet_Man said...

Incredible aren't they James.