Are conservative parties hateful?

[The Emerald Legion]

Not those specific groups no. Instead the left wants to kick people with religious beliefs out of society and push Eugenics programs onto the poor and minorities.

Because exterminating those who routinely vote for you and offending the majority of the population is totally their goal.

Unless we're not talking about authoritarian communism, in which case yeah, fuck them.

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

And, no. They just paint their eugenics programs as not eugenics programs.

[Sanghyeok]

Personally, speaking specifically about the UK, I think every party has its fair share of hateful elements. Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party being a perfect example of left-wing hate. It's just that the media, in my opinion, tends to focus more on the hateful elements of right-wing politics. Also, as the Conservative (and Unionist) Party is currently in government, it makes sense that the media would focus more on their hateful elements than those of opposition parties.

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

I agree that the Tories are relatively non hateful (on the surface at least).

[Nuroblav]

Is this post satire? I can’t stop laughing at how ridiculous this piece of art, which was probably copied and pasted from Conservapedia, is

The art of strawmanning is quite handy on the Internet (or maybe just being able to spot it, although it's not always hard).

[Celritannia]

Personally, speaking specifically about the UK, I think every party has its fair share of hateful elements. Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party being a perfect example of left-wing hate. It's just that the media, in my opinion, tends to focus more on the hateful elements of right-wing politics. Also, as the Conservative (and Unionist) Party is currently in government, it makes sense that the media would focus more on their hateful elements than those of opposition parties.

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

The amount of anti-Semitism in Labour was minute compared to accusation of anti-Semitism and islamophobia in the Tory Party.

But guess which one the mainstream media latched on to, and then suddenly fell silent after the 2019 snap election?

[Sanghyeok]

Because exterminating those who routinely vote for you and offending the majority of the population is totally their goal.

Unless we're not talking about authoritarian communism, in which case yeah, fuck them.

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

Please explain this part.

[Telconi]

Gun bans are literally published in their platform.

Ok I'll take a look. You do raise a valid concern about how a gun ban (in practice, a ban on a subset of guns) would be enforced. What would be the punishment for noncompliance? If we don't pursue that policy, what do we pursue instead?

Some questions worth answering IMO.

Well jail time is the punishment for non-compliance.

As for what we pursue instead, I personally think more robust safety nets would be the best method to reduce gun violence, as well as drug reform.

Most homicides are the results, directly or indirectly, of poverty and non-violent criminal activity, chiefly recreational drug use.

[Wizlandia]

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/ unless the russians hacked biden his own website should be a good example.

Hate to break it to you, but, neolibs aren’t leftist

Biden isn't a neolib.

[Major-Tom]

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

I agree that the Tories are relatively non hateful (on the surface at least).

I don't wanna derail this into a UK discussion, both the Tories and Labour have inoffensive and competent factions as well as offensive and incompetent factions. Boris Johnson manages to be neither, for he is only incompetent and can't decide anything else.

[Celritannia]

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

I agree that the Tories are relatively non hateful (on the surface at least).

Tell that to the Windrush scandal, the poor inquiry attempts over Grenfell, starving children, increased use of food banks.
I could go on.

[Sanghyeok]

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

The amount of anti-Semitism in Labour was minute compared to accusation of anti-Semitism and islamophobia in the Tory Party.

But guess which one the mainstream media latched on to, and then suddenly fell silent after the 2019 snap election?

To be fair, Labour did have some anti-semitism, but as you said it was far less than in the Tories.

[Celritannia]

I agree that the Tories are relatively non hateful (on the surface at least).

I don't wanna derail this into a UK discussion, both the Tories and Labour have inoffensive and competent factions as well as offensive and incompetent factions. Boris Johnson manages to be neither, for he is only incompetent and can't decide anything else.

Hahahahaha.
Oh, he is hateful.

[Albrenia]

Because exterminating those who routinely vote for you and offending the majority of the population is totally their goal.

Unless we're not talking about authoritarian communism, in which case yeah, fuck them.

Which is why increasingly the left has pushed to eliminate people with religious beliefs from the government, and tried to normalize forcing religious people to violate their beliefs if they want to work.

And, no. They just paint their eugenics programs as not eugenics programs.

Moving the goalposts a little now, I see. It's gone from 'religious people from society' to 'religious beliefs in government'.

Anyway, religious beliefs should be personal and sacred, but never enforced on others. Discrimination in general is illegal for everyone too, not just the religious.

[Major-Tom]

Hopefully, Starmer can keep purging the anti-semites out of that party.

The amount of anti-Semitism in Labour was minute compared to accusation of anti-Semitism and islamophobia in the Tory Party.

But guess which one the mainstream media latched on to, and then suddenly fell silent after the 2019 snap election?

I'm not saying the Tories don't deserve a ton of flak, they did and still do, I'm simply saying that I'm glad Corbyn is out so the radical, buffoonish MPs don't hijack an otherwise sensible party.

[Sanghyeok]

I agree that the Tories are relatively non hateful (on the surface at least).

Tell that to the Windrush scandal, the poor inquiry attempts over Grenfell, starving children, increased use of food banks.
I could go on.

I said surface, I know they're rather hateful inside. That's what makes them different from some other mainstream conservative parties.

[Crockerland]

Okay, name a major Left-wing politician in the US who opposes state violence against bump stock and gun owners. And of course I'm sure some of those reasonable people oppose the sale and manufacture of bump stocks, which as long as they don't support physical violence and state terror against people who own a bump stock is a totally reasonable and decent position. I'm sure you'll have no trouble naming these politicians.

None, because there are no left-wing politicians in the US.

There are no true Scotsmen here, either.

On a more serious level though, I don't think any US Democrat politician is in favour of hurting people with guns.

I wish I lived in your reality. Unfortunately in the real world the Democrats had no issue with one of their representatives saying that gun owners should be killed with nuclear bombs. Joe Biden supports red flag laws, a form of state terror where gun owners are swatted without being accused (much less convicted) of a crime, so it's pretty clear their violence is out of control.

[Saiwania]

Or maybe give the parents a job and a generous subsidy for raising a child. Also what Nanatsu said yeah, your opinion is not worth consideration.

It'd cost the state too much to just give out subsidies so easily. If I had a child, my feelings wouldn't matter if I can't afford to provide for them, if I'm struggling too much to provide for only myself. Objectively speaking, the child should be taken away for someone else or some place that can provide them with a better life than I can.

If a country has subreplacement level fertility, poor parents should perhaps be allowed to reproduce twice. But if the woman goes over their quota of two or three children and they can't afford childcare on their own, the state must have them be sterilized. So as to prevent people from costing the state too much money and to ensure that the national population is micromanaged as the state desires.

[Major-Tom]

I don't wanna derail this into a UK discussion, both the Tories and Labour have inoffensive and competent factions as well as offensive and incompetent factions. Boris Johnson manages to be neither, for he is only incompetent and can't decide anything else.

Hahahahaha.
Oh, he is hateful.

To the poor, certainly.

You really have to remember the bar I've set here, having had a first-hand look at US politics for far too long has really lowered my standards. I'm used to the far-right antics across the Pond, it makes your politics seem far more manageable, even if Boris is just an absolute buffoon.

[Sanghyeok]

On a more serious level though, I don't think any US Democrat politician is in favour of hurting people with guns.

I wish I lived in your reality. Unfortunately in the real world the Democrats had no issue with one of their representatives saying that gun owners should be killed with nuclear bombs.

Wait what?

[Sanghyeok]

Or maybe give the parents a job and a generous subsidy for raising a child. Also what Nanatsu said yeah, your opinion is not worth consideration.

But if the woman goes over their quota of two or three children and they can't afford childcare on their own, the state must have them be sterilized. So as to prevent people from costing the state too much money and to ensure that the national population is micromanaged as the state desires.

That sounds hateful.

[Celritannia]

The amount of anti-Semitism in Labour was minute compared to accusation of anti-Semitism and islamophobia in the Tory Party.

But guess which one the mainstream media latched on to, and then suddenly fell silent after the 2019 snap election?

I'm not saying the Tories don't deserve a ton of flak, they did and still do, I'm simply saying that I'm glad Corbyn is out so the radical, buffoonish MPs don't hijack an otherwise sensible party.

Corbyn was highly popular, and if the UK had a PR system back in 2017, he would have been able to run the country either as a minority government with support from other parties, or form a coalition.
He won a larger share of the seats than Blair did in 2005.
And his policies are still popular.

I could go on, but that's why we have the UK politics thread.

[Telconi]

I wish I lived in your reality. Unfortunately in the real world the Democrats had no issue with one of their representatives saying that gun owners should be killed with nuclear bombs.

Wait what?

And then he ran for president!

[Major-Tom]

None, because there are no left-wing politicians in the US.

There are no true Scotsmen here, either.

On a more serious level though, I don't think any US Democrat politician is in favour of hurting people with guns.

I wish I lived in your reality. Unfortunately in the real world the Democrats had no issue with one of their representatives saying that gun owners should be killed with nuclear bombs. Joe Biden supports red flag laws, a form of state terror where gun owners are swatted without being accused (much less convicted) of a crime, so it's pretty clear their violence is out of control.

A bad attempt at a joke, a tasteless one too, but I think it's hard to infer that he was actually suggesting nuking people over the gun issue.

Either way, I think perhaps there is a reason he never polled above 1%, isn't there?

[Crockerland]

Wanting innocent people and their families to face physical violence from the state for owning a bump stock is not understandable by any stretch of the definition. The Left's normalization of violence against gun owners is repulsive.

You currently live in a society where cops could break down your door and traumatize your family and put them in a cage for having a plant that the state doesn't like in your house but you are only horrified when the same thing happens over a bump stock?

So do you have an actual argument beyond whataboutism?

Also, I think you could use a refresher course in the difference between liberals and leftists. Leftists are all for the people being armed.

So which dominant left wing parties in western countries are advocating for more protection of the rights of gun owners?

[Muralos]

Left-wing media outlets have doxxed gun owners in the past. I wouldn't interpret that as innocent. And some people have expressed some frankly worrisome fantasies about how the police would respond to gun owners refusing to give up their firearms. Mind you, I don't think the motivation behind gun confiscations or regulations are rooted in hatred but hatred and nastiness often creep into the rhetoric, strategies, and visceral reactions of people who support such policies in much the same way as they do on other issues.

CNN is a bunch of corporate neolib hacks who are as left wing as apples are oranges

I think we shouldn't be arguing the "nothing in the mainstream is as left-wing as ACTUAL left-wing stuff is" argument... because (to reiterate!) in reality the liberal/neoliberal stuff we see in American politics is left-wing for many an average American.

[VlaRiSsiA]

I wish I lived in your reality. Unfortunately in the real world the Democrats had no issue with one of their representatives saying that gun owners should be killed with nuclear bombs.

Wait what?

He’s spewing so much straw it’s polluting the ocean