UKIP more Left-Wing than Tories According to new Poll - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Voters see Ukip as more left wing than the Conservative Party in a shock poll finding that will fuel concerns among Ed Miliband's allies that Nigel Farage is "parking his tanks on Labour's lawn". A poll for The Independent on Sunday exposes what Labour strategists have been fearing for months – that voters do not regard Ukip as a party of the far right, but as one closer to the centre ground than the Tories. As such it could win Labour votes in the North. It suggests that attempts by Labour to portray Mr Farage's party as "more Thatcherite than Thatcher" have fallen flat. The findings by ComRes will also be unsettling for the Conservatives, who must seize support from the centre-ground to win a majority at the next general election. It is the first time that voters have put Ukip to the left of the Conservatives, in a format in which they are asked to place parties on the left-right political spectrum. The move creates greater uncertainty over the outcome of May's election.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9923392.ece/alternates/w1024/10-Poll1.jpg"]http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9923392.ece/alternates/w1024/10-Poll1.jpg[/URL] I heard that UKIP has been somewhat moderating their stance on fiscal issues, maybe this is the result? [highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("alt of perma'd user whollyrufus" - Orkel))[/highlight]

Looking at their policies they're a mixed bag, centrists that people want.

Their economic views doesn't necessarily have anything to do with their social views though

[QUOTE=Jodern;46710474]Their economic views doesn't necessarily have anything to do with their social views though[/QUOTE] It all depends on what you think truly defines Left v. Right. Most young people nowadays think it's social issues. (Gay Marriage, Abortion, etc...)

All this poll shows is what complete morons most of the electorate are. As the title says people think that Ukip are left of the Conservatives. The Liberal Democrats are the least popular party despite their views being closest to those of the electorate. People think that the Greens/Russel Brand are less to the left wing than the Conservatives are to the right wing which is fucking nonsense even if the measure is subjective.

[QUOTE=The_1990;46710489]It all depends on what you think truly defines Left v. Right. Most young people nowadays think it's social issues. (Gay Marriage, Abortion, etc...)[/QUOTE] There is a lot more than that and it's certainly not one-dimensional. Two-dimensions is even pushing it as is three.

[QUOTE=The mouse;46710510]All this poll shows is what complete morons most of the electorate are. As the title says people think that Ukip are left of the Conservatives. The Liberal Democrats are the least popular party despite their views being closest to those of the electorate. People think that the Greens/Russel Brand are less to the left wing than the Conservatives are to the right wing which is fucking nonsense even if the measure is subjective.[/QUOTE] i don't think it really helps that the educational system pushes a whole 'right wing is the one that's bad, left wing is the one that's good!' perspective on politics. it is simply a whole lot more complicated than left or right to begin with

[QUOTE=Bobie;46710587]i don't think it really helps that the educational system pushes a whole 'right wing is the one that's bad, left wing is the one that's good!' perspective on politics. it is simply a whole lot more complicated than left or right to begin with[/QUOTE] I don't recall being told this in school

Another issue UKIP don't know who they are they say libertarion but against gays and immigration and human rights and willing to change social spending policies that upset people

[QUOTE=smurfy;46710615]I don't recall being told this in school[/QUOTE] i pretty much was. we had a very brief look at the political compass and the bottom line our teacher gave us was basically that hitler = right and our government is in the middle. and that everyone wants left

Left and Right labels are a massive disservice to today's politics.

[QUOTE=smurfy;46710615]I don't recall being told this in school[/QUOTE] There's a huge institutional left-wing bias in education. Pretty much every teacher is left-wing, [QUOTE]i pretty much was. we had a very brief look at the political compass and the bottom line our teacher gave us was basically that hitler = right and our government is in the middle. and that everyone wants left [/QUOTE] pretty much this, everyone is told that the Nazis are far right when anyone who knows anything about political philosophy knows that's bullshit. The Nazis were more left-wing authoritarians than they were right-wing, hell they were even called "National-[B]Socialists[/B]" and "German Workers Party" they nationalised production and enlarged the state, 2 things which are the antithesis of right wing ideology. Other example of Left-wing bias in education(at least from my experience) include pretty much everyone being taught from the very start that open immigration is wonderful and that anyone who has a problem with it is racist.

[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;46710705]Left and Right labels are a massive disservice to today's politics.[/QUOTE] Not really, they're just used as indicators in ways they shouldn't be. These are classifications along a spectrum, not camps or ideologies you can sum up in a few words. So you get articles like this which basically mean nothing, because apparently you can't have TWO left parties omg!!!! even though countries like Mexico have only two major parties and they're both left (ish). It ultimately means nothing for realpolitik.

[QUOTE=The mouse;46710820]There's a huge institutional left-wing bias in education. Pretty much every teacher is left-wing, pretty much this, everyone is told that the Nazis are far right when anyone who knows anything about political philosophy knows that's bullshit. The Nazis were more left-wing authoritarians than they were right-wing, hell they were even called "National-[B]Socialists[/B]" and "German Workers Party" they nationalised production and enlarged the state, 2 things which are the antithesis of right wing ideology. Other example of Left-wing bias in education(at least from my experience) include pretty much everyone being taught from the very start that open immigration is wonderful and that anyone who has a problem with it is racist.[/QUOTE] NSDAP is nothing but far right.

[QUOTE=Bobie;46710587]i don't think it really helps that the educational system pushes a whole 'right wing is the one that's bad, left wing is the one that's good!' perspective on politics. it is simply a whole lot more complicated than left or right to begin with[/QUOTE] Jesus you have a fucked up school, while I'd assume the vast majority of my teachers are Tory and most politically aware students are left wing but not Labour because Labour are Labour, our school is pretty much politically neutral towards student. While the actions of the school may appear conservative, they never bring up politics in a non objective fashion.

teachers may be encouraged to be somewhat liberal, but they're not 'all left wing'. that's an absurd assumption

[QUOTE=The mouse;46710820] pretty much this, everyone is told that the Nazis are far right when anyone who knows anything about political philosophy knows that's bullshit. The Nazis were more left-wing authoritarians than they were right-wing, hell they were even called "National-[B]Socialists[/B]" and "German Workers Party" they nationalised production and enlarged the state, 2 things which are the antithesis of right wing ideology. Other example of Left-wing bias in education(at least from my experience) include pretty much everyone being taught from the very start that open immigration is wonderful and that anyone who has a problem with it is racist.[/QUOTE] Whoah haha ok buddy. Listen, political science student here, focus on political theory, and specifically on ideology and classification, so let me just tell ya here: The spectrum is kinda funny because it doesn't really work like a checklist. It's not like "If you meet three out of the four conditions you are left"- it's more like, "How are you relative to other positions?" So we're not defining it based on "Well, because these guys believe in collectivization and social spending, they are left-wing", we're defining it based on "They have 80% the same ideological goal as reactionaries, and so therefore are 80% closer to reactionaries than they are communists". And this makes sense. The spectrum was basically born out of the French Revolution, and the way it was set up was based on parliamentary seating. People who sat to the far left were most supportive of reform and revolution, the people sitting to the far right were the most reactionary or conservative. The farther left or right you got, the more reactionary or revolutionary you were. And so from the beginning the concepts of "left" and "right" were defined by positions relative to ideologies, specifically the most extreme. It was really these ideologies that defined what left and right are. So we go down the road a bit. Left and right are defined broadly as reactionary-conservative and revolutionary-social democratic. But as new ideas start coming into the field, we have to place them. The easiest way to place them is by their relationship with other ideologies and how similar they are to the posts we have set up. And this works, and we get the spectrum we have today. For the Nazis it's easy to tell where they are. Contrary to the relatively new view that fascism is left-wing or syncretic, fascism is and always has been fitted on the right. And it's easy to see why. Fascism is extremely similar ideologically to reaction, communitarian despotism, authoritarianism, national syndicalism, conservatism, traditionalism, and militarism. It is only slightly similar ideologically to nationalist communism, socialism, and syndicalism. And because it actually encompassed more right-wing positions in more extremes than most other right-wing positions, we can easily regard it as not only in the right-wing, but one of those measuring posts for the far-right. Not only is it right-wing, it is now one of the definitions of right-wing. Now of course we can all just look at a name and be like "well duh they have socialism in their name they must be Marxians and not despotic-communitarians." Anyone who knew anything about nazi ideology would probably know that the socialism in the name is actually derived from a mistranslation of the Italian "syndicalism" into German- not "socialism"- and so in Germany the concepts of syndicalism and socialism would be confused. Fascism, being a form of national syndicalism (corporatism), completely jives with the idea that it is right-wing. Corporatism/national syndicalism had long been seen as an effective far-right-wing method of organizing the nation-state. "But it says socialism" doesn't cut it. Y'know who else has socialism in their name? The French Socialist Party. Unfortunately I don't see Hollande collectivizing the land or dissolving private enterprise for workers' committees. tl'dr the idea that the nazis are left-wing is hilariously silly and a relatively new idea spouted primarily by people who don't know what the fuck they're talking about want to demonize the left. Seriously guys you have like, Pol Pot and Kim Jong Un and Stalin, I'm sure you can make use of those scapegoats well enough without trying to make Hitler into the boogeyman for the left so the "new right" can do its thing without being likened to Nazis.

[QUOTE=Rossy167;46710941]Jesus you have a fucked up school, while I'd assume the vast majority of my teachers are Tory and most politically aware students are left wing but not Labour because Labour are Labour, our school is pretty much politically neutral towards student. While the actions of the school may appear conservative, they never bring up politics in a non objective fashion.[/QUOTE] well i won't lie, when i was at school almost every teacher was a tory. they were all just under the impression that the tories weren't an inherently right-wing party (especially economically). it was probably because of how affluent the area was though, and how the area has consistently had a tory MP since the thatcher era. they're probably all ukip leaning now though since ukip are slowly dominating essex

[QUOTE=.Lain;46710945]teachers may be encouraged to be somewhat liberal, but they're not 'all left wing'. that's an absurd assumption[/QUOTE] This is true. In general, educating the masses is more of a left-center concept, or a left-wing concept, so people who are educators are more apt to be left-leaning, as are educational institutions in general. Unless we want to go back to teaching the bible and teaching authoritarian social structures and hierarchies of racial or gender roles that make up "traditional" education, then we can't really avoid a left-of-center bias in education. This doesn't mean that individual educators are going to be left-leaning (my own education was filled with many, many conservative and traditionalist teachers), however there is a true "bias" that inherently comes with mass education.

[QUOTE=The mouse;46710820]There's a huge institutional left-wing bias in education. Pretty much every teacher is left-wing, pretty much this, everyone is told that the Nazis are far right when anyone who knows anything about political philosophy knows that's bullshit. The Nazis were more left-wing authoritarians than they were right-wing, hell they were even called "National-[B]Socialists[/B]" and "German Workers Party" they nationalised production and enlarged the state, 2 things which are the antithesis of right wing ideology.[/QUOTE] how can you say the Nazis were leftwing when a massive portion of their thought was derived in origin from rightwing german social and political movements?

[QUOTE=Deng;46710990]how can you say the Nazis were leftwing when a massive portion of their thought was derived in origin from rightwing german social and political movements?[/QUOTE] Well apparently I was wrong to say that and I accept that.

[QUOTE=Deng;46710990]how can you say the Nazis were leftwing when a massive portion of their thought was derived in origin from rightwing german social and political movements?[/QUOTE] Nazism is a bit of both. Socially conservative, governmentally "left" (as in a strong state to enforce social policies). You could have reaped the benefits of their welfare programs... if you were German. Anyone who denies this simply doesn't want fingers pointed at their own wing due to association. See: DAF and NSV

[QUOTE=The mouse;46710820] pretty much this, everyone is told that the Nazis are far right when anyone who knows anything about political philosophy knows that's bullshit. The Nazis were more left-wing authoritarians than they were right-wing, hell they were even called "National-[B]Socialists[/B]" and "German Workers Party" they nationalised production and enlarged the state, [B]2 things which are the antithesis of right wing ideology[/B]. [/QUOTE] This is also kinda wrong. The old right was almost entirely powerful state ideologies. The empowering of the nation and the use of the state to enact the will and enforce the values of the nation is a defining staple of the right from the very beginning. The empowered nation-state is the foundation for the old right. Center-right and aspects of the new right are supportive of lowering government influence in favor of social liberalism, but the basis of that ideology of "hand-off" is itself born out of western conservatism, where "government power" has always been likened to left-centrism and suffocating of national values. While this isn't a new conception of the right, it is not the defining feature of, nor has it been until the 70s a major aspect of, right or even center-right politics in most of the world. The "hands-off" idoelogy is actually pretty interesting because even though it's based out of western conservatism, especially American conservatism, its realpolitik ends up with the opposite effect in many instances. Rather than emphasizing the conservative values which birthed it, it opens up the society to values other than the traditional values of the majority of the nation. So in a way, the people who see UKIP as center are mostly right. [editline]14th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Jund;46711059]Nazism is a bit of both. Socially conservative, governmentally "left" (as in a strong state to enforce social policies). You could have reaped the benefits of their welfare programs... if you were German. Anyone who denies this simply doesn't want fingers pointed at their own wing due to association.[/QUOTE] Everything's a bit of everything. That doesn't mean anything really. And as I just explained above, a "strong state" with "social policies" isn't a feature of the left, or even the right. It's generally across the board. It's the intent of the state that defines if it's right or left.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];46711067'] Everything's a bit of everything. That doesn't mean anything really. And as I just explained above, a "strong state" with "social policies" isn't a feature of the left, or even the right. It's generally across the board. It's the intent of the state that defines if it's right or left.[/QUOTE] How are leftist (even during that time) social policies enacted by the state not leftist because the state is right?

[QUOTE=Jund;46711135]How are leftist (even during that time) social policies enacted by the state not leftist because the state is right?[/QUOTE] Because most states have welfare policies and public works programs. These were even common in early conservative nation-states. Every state has social policies, and if you wield them with the intent in strengthening the nation-state, nationalism, tradition values, militarism, and so on, then you're acting in an ideologically right intent. Strong social policies are not a hallmark of the left, and the left did not invent the use of strong social policies. While center-left does rely heavily on them, and one could define the general left as being heavily supportive of them, the intent of those policies is what makes them left. If the intent is to support left values, then implementing social policies is left. If the intent is to support right values, then implementing social policies is right. Social policies are a tool to enact an ideology, not an ideology in and of themselves. We tend to think of them as part of an ideology because liberalism (centrism) constantly bickers over the use and intent of social policies, and so the center-left is almost entirely defined from the center-right by the acceptance of social policies in the west. But this is only a small part of the spectrum, and when we're talking extremes like nazism, it's mostly inapplicable. If you want to compare FDR and Reagan, yea, social policies are a good way to define their ideologies and make distinctions between the program of the liberal left and the liberal right. If you want to compare Hitler, Stalin, and FDR, using social policies is kind of silly because you're comparing three distinct and vastly different ideologies that all used social policies as a way of promoting pro-state goals.

Another thing to consider about the political spectrum is that it is not continuously the same through out history. The reason people get the idea that the Right side is associated with small government and an emphasis on individuality and freedom is because that is what many current conservatives and in some countries, reactionaries want and most conservatives and reactionaries lean Right. This is because in the 18th the Age of Enlightenment begun and new political progressives sprung up all around spreading these ideas of small government, individualism, and personal and economic freedom. These were very progressive ideas at the time. In most places these ideas succeeded, and their proponents became the conservatives of the era, and the ideas began to move from the left to the center of the spectrum. Now that most countries have move passed these ideas they have drifted further away from progressiveness and towards conservatism, and the reactionary both due to their place in history and how their effectiveness. The idea of economic freedom is considered a Right idea now because the Right believes that social and economic inequality is justifiable in some fashion, be it as an inevitability or a tool, and economic freedom has been shown to create a massive class divide. Progressives, Radicals, "The Left", Conservatives, Reactionaries, and "The Right" are all concepts born from the French Revolution, they've only been around for just over 200 years, and yet they have taken politics by storm. Like many things however the popular idea of what is Left and Right is extraordinary erroneous and I would recommend anyone interested in politics to study what exactly is Left and Right. For example, I support National Healthcare, Free Education, Right to Food; Water; and Shelter, however; if I were to place my self on the political spectrum, I would be leaning towards the Right instead of the Left.

Frankly, I'd say that more than anything, this country needs political education. Kids (including myself) will [I]only[/I] learn about politics by choosing to immerse themselves into it, which with late-teenagers is a good way to achieve absolutely nothing. This is the reason why the older generations are the vote deciders nowadays; the majority of young people, barring those with very strong political views (eg myself), don't vote or see the point in voting. [editline]14th December 2014[/editline] If all the people whose vote 'wouldn't make a difference' got together and voted, their votes [I]would make a difference[/I].

[QUOTE=Vasili;46710469]Looking at their policies they're a mixed bag, centrists that people want.[/QUOTE] Exactly. This isn't exactly new, UKIP has always been a lot more open to ideas from both the left and right.

[QUOTE=The_1990;46710489]It all depends on what you think truly defines Left v. Right. Most young people nowadays think it's social issues. (Gay Marriage, Abortion, etc...)[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukip-councillor-bisexuals-transgender-people-are-part-time-homosexuals-1441347[/url] this worries me greatly as someone who fits in with one of the two. I would never vote UKIP, not even a chance in hell now.