Left wing or right wing?

[Matabiri]

Having been accused - again - in casual conversation of being right wing, I'd like to propose the following divide:

Right wing: treats politics as a joke, plays Devil's advocate to try and get a rise out of people, and suggests ridiculous policies to get a reaction. Because people are funny when they're angry.

Left wing: takes everything too seriously.

By this definition I am obviously right wing. I was wondering if other people had also experienced this.

Thoughts, comments, spare change?

[Suddenly]

I treat politics as a joke, but I'm very serious about jokes.

Does that make me a center? I never could play the wing....


I does explain quite a bit if the conservatives are really just pulling our leg. Maybe they need to tell Bush that they are just kidding...

[Matabiri]

The reason this came up is because I was arguing - semi-seriously - that the British PM is overcompensated for his job.

Consider:

He earns £163,000 per year. After tax = approx. £100,000. He has almost no expenses.

He gets (as an MP) a final salary pension, 1/40th for every year he works. Even assuming he is only an MP for five years, that pension is worth £20,000 per year.

So after five years (one full term) as PM, he's put £500,000 in the bank and has a pension (when he's 65) of £20,000 per year. Which is pretty good compensation for any job, and will (if you're not completely cr*p) sort you out for the rest of your life.

[epepke]

Originally posted by Matabiri
Having been accused - again - in casual conversation of being right wing, I'd like to propose the following divide:

Right wing: treats politics as a joke, plays Devil's advocate to try and get a rise out of people, and suggests ridiculous policies to get a reaction. Because people are funny when they're angry.

Left wing: takes everything too seriously.

By this definition I am obviously right wing. I was wondering if other people had also experienced this.

Thoughts, comments, spare change?

Yeah, I can dig it. And I'm even American.

[epepke]

Originally posted by Suddenly
I treat politics as a joke, but I'm very serious about jokes.

I think seriousness is hilarious.

[Tricky]

I consider myself left of center, and I find just the opposite relationship. To me, everything has an element of humor in it. On these boards, I find that is the conservative element who is the first to accuse and the first to resort to acrimony. Obviously, there are numerous exceptions on both sides.

But what I really find is that the fringe elements are the ones without humor, both left and right. Those of us closer to the middle tend to wobble across the dividing line and laugh at both sides. There is a certain rabid quality about a right-to-life right winger or an animal rights left-winger (who, interestingly, defend similar concepts, put are considered to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum).

But of course, the definitions vary from place to place, and particularly between Europe and America. British conservatives would be American Democrats, and British liberals would be in the Green party on the left side of the pond.

[Matabiri]

Originally posted by Tricky
But of course, the definitions vary from place to place, and particularly between Europe and America. British conservatives would be American Democrats, and British liberals would be in the Green party on the left side of the pond.

Does that mean that no-one in Britain would vote Republican?

You're probably right about extremes - but if you like joking about things you're probably very likely to touch a nerve fairly quickly, and be accused of being opposite whoever you're talking to, politically speaking.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Matabiri


Does that mean that no-one in Britain would vote Republican?
Not very many. Maybe a few old hard-core Thatcherites who fondly remember her love affair with Ronald Reagan.;)
Originally posted by Matabiri
You're probably right about extremes - but if you like joking about things you're probably very likely to touch a nerve fairly quickly, and be accused of being opposite whoever you're talking to, politically speaking.
Well, you do have a point there. Only recently I took a light-hearted poke at Troll, only to have him go postal on me. I was able to divert his anger to a flame war (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32351) (where I thrashed him soundly :p ), but jesting does have its peril. However, based on my acceptance as a non-loony by much of the right wing here (see Kodiak's sig if you need proof), I'd say anyone can see that gentle humor, particularly if you remember to also insult yourself, tends to lessen the tension here rather than the reverse. Of course, I wouldn't expect a three-eyed fish to see anything clearly.

[Cain]

Originally posted by Matabiri
Does that mean that no-one in Britain would vote Republican?

Yes, it means no one in Britain would ever vote Republican. C'mon, there are stupid people everywhere, even in England.

The political spectrum in the United States -- this is a common and widely accepted observation -- is to noticeably shifted to the right of europe. Hell, many Republicans from thirty years ago would today be considered liberal.

In both polite and serious conversation I describe myself as an anarchist, often accompanied with a puckish grin. You might find the same expression on the face of a real-life hitman when tells others he's a contract-killer. And like a professional assassin, I rarely volunteer this information.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Tricky
Not very many. Maybe a few old hard-core Thatcherites who fondly remember her love affair with Ronald Reagan.;)

Well, you do have a point there. Only recently I took a light-hearted poke at Troll, only to have him go postal on me. I was able to divert his anger to a flame war (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32351) (where I thrashed him soundly :p ), but jesting does have its peril. However, based on my acceptance as a non-loony by much of the right wing here (see Kodiak's sig if you need proof), I'd say anyone can see that gentle humor, particularly if you remember to also insult yourself, tends to lessen the tension here rather than the reverse. Of course, I wouldn't expect a three-eyed fish to see anything clearly.

Well I'd hardly say I went postal. But then exaggeration seems to be a left-wing trait, so I guess in your crazy little mind I went postal.:p

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Troll
Well I'd hardly say I went postal. But then exaggeration seems to be a left-wing trait, so I guess in your crazy little mind I went postal.:p
I only meant you went to Flame Wars and got stamped, (he said, innocently.)

[Troll]

Originally posted by Tricky

I only meant you went to Flame Wars and got stamped, (he said, innocently.)

Stamped? Merely tested the waters. But don't worry,I'll be back over there soon enough. And you can let loose with the best your brain can offer, because it sure ain't offering much in the serious discussion arenas here. :p

[Theodore Kurita]

I consider myself to be a Democratic Socialist, when you take a look at our political scale here in the US.

I am also cofounder and President of our Young Democratic Socialists Club at our High School. :)

For those of you interested in what our current United States Democratic Socialist platform is like, read here:

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

And yes, we were smart enough to NOT form a political party from it. It would break the backbone of the left. The only shot we really have in the United States of having a system with more than 2 parties is if the, "Independents" or "Libertarians" got there act together and form stronger political parties that appeal to people on the right.


Oh, and for you European folks.

Democratic Socialist (USA) = Social Democrat (European)

[peptoabysmal]

Being a right-winger, I sometimes get treated like a far right wing "fundy" (religious connotations), which I am definitely not. In Australia, it seems everything is upside down and inverted, so I guess I would be a left-winger there. It’s not that way in the British Isles, is it?

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita
I consider myself to be a Democratic Socialist, when you take a look at our political scale here in the US.

I am also cofounder and President of our Young Democratic Socialists Club at our High School. :)

For those of you interested in what our current United States Democratic Socialist platform is like, read here:

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

And yes, we were smart enough to NOT form a political party from it. It would break the backbone of the left. The only shot we really have in the United States of having a system with more than 2 parties is if the, "Independents" or "Libertarians" got there act together and form stronger political parties that appeal to people on the right.


Oh, and for you European folks.

Democratic Socialist (USA) = Social Democrat (European)

Thank you for confirming my belief that trying to erode the two party system in the US is a socialist agenda. And you can just shorten that to Democrat = socialist, IMO.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Matabiri
The reason this came up is because I was arguing - semi-seriously - that the British PM is overcompensated for his job.

Consider:

He earns £163,000 per year. After tax = approx. £100,000. He has almost no expenses.

He gets (as an MP) a final salary pension, 1/40th for every year he works. Even assuming he is only an MP for five years, that pension is worth £20,000 per year.

So after five years (one full term) as PM, he's put £500,000 in the bank and has a pension (when he's 65) of £20,000 per year. Which is pretty good compensation for any job, and will (if you're not completely cr*p) sort you out for the rest of your life.

Lets see: What else can you do with no minimum qualifications?

If you are fit and young you could join the army for £12000 a year. Or set up shop as a burglar.... or become a politician for £163000!

Oops, I see you do have to have a couple of GCSEs to be a sojer!

So that just leaves becoming a lying, thieving cnut who ruins peoples lives, or you could become a burglar!

Why were you called right-wing for this btw?

[Cain]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal


Thank you for confirming my belief that trying to erode the two party system in the US is a socialist agenda. And you can just shorten that to Democrat = socialist, IMO.

What are you talking about? We basically have a one-party system representing business interests. On social issues the Democrats pay a lot of lip service to homosexuals, women's rights groups and minorities. The right-wing panders to religious groups and gun-rights advocates (among others).

David Brooks had a column yesterday citing statistics showing Democrats are evenly divided on major issues of the day. The Democrats are now basically Republican-lite.

[Matabiri]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

Why were you called right-wing for this btw?

I think it was supposed to be an insult. Along with being accused of reading the Daily Mail (which hit considerably harder...)

Oh, I remember - it was because I suggested that his salary should be "performance-linked", although I have no idea how this could be accomplished. Make each MP's salary a percentage of the national turnover?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Matabiri


I think it was supposed to be an insult. Along with being accused of reading the Daily Mail (which hit considerably harder...)


Oooooooo!!! Below The Belt!!!

Originally posted by Matabiri

Oh, I remember - it was because I suggested that his salary should be "performance-linked", although I have no idea how this could be accomplished. Make each MP's salary a percentage of the national turnover?

This may be a good idea- lets take the example of a cabinet minister, say the minister for transport.

Set a minimum salary- £15,000 being what a graduate can expect and so should be good enough for a crap minister. And a maximum, say £250,000 which is a definite incentive and good value for money for the best service.

Now take a base rate of around £115,000 which will be the starting pay. Set targets ie. 95% of trains should depart within 5minutes of the scheduled time. If, like at present, the figure is only 79% then the minister takes a 16% pay cut for each month every month while this remains so until said minister bottoms out at impoverished graduate level or until the service improves.

Somehow I feel that the trains would get very good very quickly were this regime enforced!

I think that sounds great!

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Cain


Yes, it means no one in Britain would ever vote Republican. C'mon, there are stupid people everywhere, even in England.
I don't think anyone in the UK would, as, from my experience, they associate the word "Republican" with the Northern Irish terrorist variety, not he American variety. This from describing myself as a Yorkshire republican ("Devolution for Yorkshire!") and people responded by asking me if I plant bombs. Mind you, when I've described myself as an anarcho-socialist, they still ask me if I plant bombs. So now I say I'm a landscape anarchist and I plant flowers, but where people least expect it.

Originally posted by Matabiri
Oh, I remember - it was because I suggested that his salary should be "performance-linked", although I have no idea how this could be accomplished. Make each MP's salary a percentage of the national turnover?
I'm up for this. In ref to your OP, Blair's demonstrably right-wing, and he treats politics as a joke. Case proven!

[epepke]

Originally posted by Matabiri
Does that mean that no-one in Britain would vote Republican?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but mumble mumble MARGARET THATCHER mumble mumble. She was not only what we'd call a Republican, but IMO like Reagan, a fascist. Even George Bush Sr. wasn't a fascist.

As for the rest of that side of the pond, well, Pim Fortuyn wasn't born in Iowa.

[Giz]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Oooooooo!!! Below The Belt!!!



This may be a good idea- lets take the example of a cabinet minister, say the minister for transport.

Set a minimum salary- £15,000 being what a graduate can expect and so should be good enough for a crap minister. And a maximum, say £250,000 which is a definite incentive and good value for money for the best service.

Now take a base rate of around £115,000 which will be the starting pay. Set targets ie. 95% of trains should depart within 5minutes of the scheduled time. If, like at present, the figure is only 79% then the minister takes a 16% pay cut for each month every month while this remains so until said minister bottoms out at impoverished graduate level or until the service improves.

Somehow I feel that the trains would get very good very quickly were this regime enforced!

I think that sounds great!

Link em all to the National Average earnings! A regular MP could be two times NAE (I'm feeling generous), a minister 3 times and the PM 4 times. Make them think feel the effects of recessions! might concentrate their minds...

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Giz


Link em all to the National Average earnings! A regular MP could be two times NAE (I'm feeling generous), a minister 3 times and the PM 4 times. Make them think feel the effects of recessions! might concentrate their minds...

With a %age cut from their pay according to the %age unemployment may bring some added focus.

[specious_reasons]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal
Being a right-winger, I sometimes get treated like a far right wing "fundy" (religious connotations), which I am definitely not. In Australia, it seems everything is upside down and inverted, so I guess I would be a left-winger there. It’s not that way in the British Isles, is it?

The whole right-wing/left-wing classification system is based on the UK Parliament.

[Matabiri]

Originally posted by specious_reasons


The whole right-wing/left-wing classification system is based on the UK Parliament.

Ah! Is that why the "right wing" is the natural party of government...? They're sitting in the correct seats?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Cain

Democrats pay a lot of lip service to homosexuals

That's what homosexuals want!

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Matabiri
The reason this came up is because I was arguing - semi-seriously - that the British PM is overcompensated for his job.

Consider:

He earns £163,000 per year. After tax = approx. £100,000. He has almost no expenses.

He gets (as an MP) a final salary pension, 1/40th for every year he works. Even assuming he is only an MP for five years, that pension is worth £20,000 per year.

So after five years (one full term) as PM, he's put £500,000 in the bank and has a pension (when he's 65) of £20,000 per year. Which is pretty good compensation for any job, and will (if you're not completely cr*p) sort you out for the rest of your life.

For American Presidents, it is similar. But the real money doesn't start rolling in until after they leave office.

Speaking engagement fees. The "mashed potato circuit." That's where the money is.

[Mendor]

Originally posted by specious_reasons
The whole right-wing/left-wing classification system is based on the UK Parliament. French parliament, I thought - the radicals sat to the left of the speaker, the reactionaries to the right.