We bashed #RedOctober, now let's bash this too! #EFF

Chris said:
Nationalisation is a left-wing economic policy.
Click to expand...

The EFF are running on right wing civility.

There is more than one right wing and left wing. One is economic the other one normally has to do with civil liberties and civil integration.

Like when we complain about right wing racists. Its got nothing to do with their economic standing and everything to do on how they treat society.

So as I said. While the EFF are economically very far left (so far left that most on the left dislike them a lot), their words are more right wing (hate based). A person who is a lefty liberal is normally about social and racial harmony. Which these images have none of.

Think of it this way. During Apartheid they were known to be right wing even though they had leftist nationalist economic policies. Same applies here. These dude while economically left, are socially right wing.
 
Last edited:
ghoti said:
A person a lefty liberal is normally about social and racial harmony.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the harmony area is that place right in the middle. The further left and right you go, the more extreme and more dangerous the territory becomes.
 
Flanders said:
I disagree. I think the harmony area is that place right in the middle. The further left and right you go, the more extreme and more dangerous the territory becomes.
Click to expand...
No, far right is absolute hate, far left is absolute "harmony" (Im using this for lack of a better word). Like a hippy that thinks a dog should have equal rights to a human is far left socially. Otherwise by what criteria do you separate the two hates in your version? Cause right now it looks like skin color.

Think about it, in your version of social far left what would be considered bad? Cause Im willing to bet its based on economic reasons why you hate it (like a communist or something).
 
ghoti said:
No, far right is absolute hate, far left is absolute "harmony" (Im using this for lack of a better word). Like a hippy that thinks a dog should have equal rights to a human is far left socially. Otherwise by what criteria do you separate the two hates in your version? Cause right now it looks like skin color.

Think about it, in your version of social far left what would be considered bad? Cause Im willing to bet its based on economic reasons why you hate it (like a communist or something).
Click to expand...

Isn't abortion considered left? I would consider that outside of your "harmony" view.
 
ghoti said:
Otherwise by what criteria do you separate the two hates in your version?
Click to expand...

I don't separate it. Hate is hate. It's the ideologies leading up to that hatred (or, to a lesser degree, opposing views) that makes the difference. The grey space in between is where sanity prevails.
 
Flanders said:
I don't separate it. Hate is hate. It's the ideologies leading up to that hatred (or, to a lesser degree, opposing views) that makes the difference. The grey space in between is where sanity prevails.
Click to expand...

You are not understanding.....

Theyre not the same things.....

I understand you think middle ground is awesome.. but for which left and right? Economically or socially? And if you say socially the left wing are full of hate (not economic left) I challenged you to give an example. Which you havent.

Malema and his group are a bunch of right wing racists running their campaign on some far left economic policies. Exactly the same as what the artards in Apartheid did. Hitler is another example of a right wing racist running on far left economic policies.
 
Last edited:
EFF is not left wing. They are extreme right wing. Somewhere between the Nazis and old NP
 
TelkomUseless said:
How is that not racist? Swap white for black and you would have been in jail 15min later...
Click to expand...

This. Completely and then some more.

I still don't get why all those that called the Red October people racist aren't doing the same here?

Unless of course they are all hypocritical?
 
ghoti said:
You are not understanding.....

Theyre not the same things.....

I understand you think middle ground is awesome.. but for which left and right? Economically or socially? And if you say socially the left wing are full of hate (not economic left) I challenged you to give an example. Which you havent.

Malema and his group are a bunch of right wing racists running their campaign on some far left economic policies. Exactly the same as what the artards in Apartheid did. Hitler is another example of a right wing racist running on far left economic policies.
Click to expand...

Ok, so social right wing = hate and social left wing = not hate?
Economic left wing = give me your stuff for free and economic right wing = do it your damned self?

Well blow me down, I never knew I could be in such different places at once!
 
The EFF identifies itself as a Marxist-Leninist-Fanonian movement of the left, emphatically anti-capitalist domination. They also regard the modern day ANC as right-wing, the co-opted security guard of minority capital.
 
So Mugabe is right wing. Sure that is news to him. Old Communist states like the USSR, N.Korea, Cuba, Vietnam etc are rightwing?

I think not.
 
Alan said:
So Mugabe is right wing. Sure that is news to him. Old Communist states like the USSR, N.Korea, Cuba, Vietnam etc are rightwing?

I think not.
Click to expand...

According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics, in liberal democracies the political Right opposes socialism and social democracy. Right-wing parties include conservatives, Christian democrats, classical liberals, nationalists and, on the far Right, racists and fascists.[26]
Click to expand...

Sounds pretty much like all of the above to me.

The 'reactionary right' looks toward the past and is "aristocratic, religious and authoritarian".[29]

The 'moderate right' is typified by the writings of Edmund Burke. It is tolerant of change, provided it is gradual, and accepts some aspects of liberalism, including the rule of law and capitalism, although it sees radical laissez-faire and individualism as harmful to society. Often it promotes nationalism and social welfare policies.[30]

The 'radical right' is a term developed after the Second World War to describe groups as different as McCarthyism, the John Birch Society, Thatcherism, the Republikaner Party in West Germany, and so on. Eatwell stresses that this use has "major typological problems" and that the term "has also been applied to clearly democratic developments." [31] It includes right-wing populism and various other subtypes.[32]

The 'extreme right' has four traits according to Roger Eatwell: "1)anti-democracy; 2) nationalism; 3) racism; 4) the strong state". He adds that violence is now dropped as a characteristic.[33]

The 'New Right' consists of the liberal conservatives, who stress small government, free markets, and individual initiative.[34]
Click to expand...

Pretty much how I've always perceived "the right."
 
Chevron said:
This. Completely and then some more.

I still don't get why all those that called the Red October people racist aren't doing the same here?

Unless of course they are all hypocritical?
Click to expand...

If you put half as much effort defending them as you did the people at red october... :D

Just kidding. People see what they want to see, we're all unhappy
 
The 'New Right' consists of the liberal conservatives, who stress small government, free markets, and individual initiative.
Click to expand...

Odd "new" right is essentially a classical liberal which been around for centuries...

Plenty of incidents of intolerence, hate and persecution from the left throughout history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X