The Labservative Party

[Swatopluk]

I think it highly depends how the different factors of influence are weighed. The US Right loves to depict Hitler as a leftie, occasionally* quoting 'typically leftist' projects like animal protection, public schools, 'reform' food, state sponsoring of 'The Arts' etc. Also Hitler made the 1st of May a national (workfree) holiday.
Seriously, Nazi Germany differed from the other fascist regimes of the time** in a few 'leftist' ways. There were actual attempts to do away with the class system and furthering upward mobility. And Hitler did not ally/share power with the churches after he took power. His plans for after a won WW2 included a systematic campaign against religion turning churches into science museums and observatories (Volkssternwarten). Privately Hitler seems to have believed only in fate (Vorsehung) in a diffuse way but was otherwise a rationalist. He loved to mock Himmler for his superstitions and belief in pseudoscience (racism of course was still sound science).
Nazism duirng its rule was quite a mishmash that does not fit properly in the left/right scheme. It contained elements from all over the spectrum (even after the night of long knifes). The uniting factor was authoritarianism.

I think Stalin may be a bit too far left on the graph, if we look at the 'real existing Stalinism' and byond the rhetoric.

*most are content to point to the nationalSOCIALISM label
**in most cases clerical fascism with the state church being a significant part of the power system usually controlling education.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Greens are libertarian?  Strict environmental policy demands a pretty authoritarian approach, even if your average Green voter isn't necessarily a big supporter of it.

I think they make a distinction between what they consider libertarianism (civil liberties, habeas corpus, anti profiling, etc) and what in the US (perhaps Canada?) is considered libertarianism, which at times borderlines anarchism (ie: I'm free do to whatever I please) particularly within the confines of the individual's property. Certainly a green party would curb down such "freedoms" specifically when it deals with pollution and things like animal cruelty, but you can't say that a green party would transform a country into a police state*.

I took the test.  I am deeply disappointed with the result.     Can't be true.

Perchance you found yourself far more lefty than you would ever think possible?

The test measures certain attitudes and parties usually target those but rarely act on those, IOW, they say they'll do one thing but usually do something quite different.

Also is important to understand that certain stances seem far more radical than what those really are/mean. Personally I consider myself a center, center-left kind of person but the test places me on the very left. In practice I don't want to tax every corporation into extinction nor over-regulate, but I do see the need for regulations and I see a reason for the state to exist in more than a military/police kind of way. On the same token, most self-proclaimed right/center right** people don't want to abolish all taxes and regulations but think that as exist today, those create an unnecessary burden that doesn't benefit society as a whole.

The point here is that Labour in the UK (as the Democrats in the US) claim to be on the left but they consistently vote on the right end of the spectrum, and as such they appear in that upper right quadrant. Smaller parties haven't had the chance to vote hence their estimated position is based on their stated policy, which may or may not be what they would vote for once in power.


*regardless of what the extreme right usually claims on the subject.
**we're excluding the fundies and fanatics here, they do claim that the state should only exist to protect private property.

[Swatopluk]

Btw, I come out as -6;-5.38 but some of the questions are to Anglo/US-specific and/or would require more than an agree/disagree answer.
E.g. in Germany I am a strict opponent of homeschooling (except in extraordinary circumstances) but in the US I would at least consider it given the low quality of the public school system in general and things like the Texas Board of Education in particular. Also the 'spanking' of children is such a broad field that a simple yes/no does not cover it. It should never be a standard tool of education but I find it absurd to send parents to jail for single slap.

[Griffin NoName]

The point here is that Labour in the UK (as the Democrats in the US) claim to be on the left but they consistently vote on the right end of the spectrum, and as such they appear in that upper right quadrant.

This is NEW Labour which has ditched it's links to socialism. And right is now called "centre". Which means that NEW Labour is a centre party in theory. As are all the others apart from the weird ones and the fascists. IMO.

We don't have a Labour party any more 

I keep hoping that some bright spark will come up with OLD Labour, returning it to its roots, but there's no likely candidates.

I can say this without fear of reprisals as we lack the scrutiny of Beagle, sad to say

[Aggie]

I think they make a distinction between what they consider libertarianism (civil liberties, habeas corpus, anti profiling, etc) and what in the US (perhaps Canada?) is considered libertarianism, which at times borderlines anarchism (ie: I'm free do to whatever I please) particularly within the confines of the individual's property. Certainly a green party would curb down such "freedoms" specifically when it deals with pollution and things like animal cruelty, but you can't say that a green party would transform a country into a police state*.

I've never heard the word used up here...  we all prefer to have a big, inept government so that we can swear at them.  The general Canadian attitude is that people are free to do as they please so long as it doesn't impact anyone else, whereas I get the distinct impression that in America it's more important for ideologies to prove WE IZ TEH CORRECT WAY! and impose that on everyone else.  There's so much wilderness up here that if you want to be a libertarian in practice, you can just move further out and nobody with bother you.

[Griffin NoName]

I don't want a Tory govt. etc etc but I can put up with DC as PM but George Osborne as Chancellor is truly scary.

[Ageis]

Cameron freaks me out.
Theres something vaguely reptilian about him.
I tend to think of him like one of those aliens from V.
I expect that if you walked in on him suddenly you would catch him swallowing live mice whole.
Mark my words one day soon he'll fall off his bike, have a serious spill, loose some skin and reveal his true scaly skin beneath.

I can't help but feel that the man has not a single principle or policy he has which he would not drop at a moments notice if it were to benefit him.

Also Grrr

[Griffin NoName]

I think Michael Gove is more reptilian than Cameron. Though I tend to agree with you.

Since my last post they have announced some of the policies in the coalition. I can't imagine what all that bargaining was about as the Lib Dems seem to have totally sold out to the Tories. Double double Grrrrrrrrrrrr as I thought they'd at least keep the Tories from the Very Worst Bad Things. Perhaps Nick Clegg just wanted to be Deputy PM.

The thing that is making me crossest is the <Grrrrrrrrr> Marriage Tax break </Grrrrrrrrrrrr> - how to go back about 2 centuries in one hop. Retards. It's far cheaper to live as a couple than as a single person who has to manage all bills on their own................ and how many single people would just love to be part of a cosy nuclear marriage if they could........... and who are they kidding in taking the moral high ground.......... I know this is a slight over-reacction on my part and stuff like the economy and Trident et al are more important but I never wanted to get divorced............ !

[Aggie]

It's far cheaper to live as a couple than as a single person who has to manage all bills on their own................ and how many single people would just love to be part of a cosy nuclear marriage if they could........... and who are they kidding in taking the moral high ground.......... I know this is a slight over-reacction on my part and stuff like the economy and Trident et al are more important but I never wanted to get divorced............ !

Ayuh, me either, but I will dispute that it's cheaper to live as a couple in practice (in theory I agree).  I'll likely put away more savings in the next year than in the last 7 cumulatively (albeit not equal to total year by year).

Slightly more then half the rent, significantly less than half the credit card bills..... 

[beagle]

I can say this without fear of reprisals as we lack the scrutiny of Beagle, sad to say

Abolition of ID cards, restrictions on the DNA database, and on internet monitoring and CCTV, taking the lowest paid out of taxation altogether (G.B. even taxed those on minimum wage). What's not to like. 

[Sibling DavidH]

Hey Beagle, welcome home!

I agree with Ageis and Griffin that Cameron and co. are none too attractive, but then, they're politicians!
Personally, I'm not getting all excited about this 'new politics', 'good of the nation' and all that bilge.  IF they turn out to be a bit better, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

[Griffin NoName]

Yes, indeed, welcome back.

Abolition of ID cards, restrictions on the DNA database, and on internet monitoring and CCTV, taking the lowest paid out of taxation altogether (G.B. even taxed those on minimum wage). What's not to like. 

You've chosen the good bits. I didn't say there were no good bits. But they are just bits. Wait til the economy collapses (again ok ok)

[beagle]

They've only been in power a day and already youth unemployment is the highest ever. ruddy Tories

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Beagle! We missed you!   
--
How are you coping with those evil LibDems sharing power?

[Griffin NoName]

They've only been in power a day and already youth unemployment is the highest ever. ruddy Tories

Hey! That's like blaming Gordon Brown for the economic crisis !