So just recently a comic had a bit of a rant on Facebook, about the easy and cheap shots that repeatedly get taken against UKIP, Eurosceptics and people who are generally concerned about this country and its future. This has sparked a little bit of a discussion regarding left and right wing comedians, how there are supposedly so many left wing ones and very few right wing ones.
This has brought the whole left/right thing to the forefront again and I thought I'd have a rant about it here. I personally consider myself somewhat of an anomaly politically, but given the choice, I will place myself slightly to the right of centre. Now that's completely aside from the fact that I think the spectrum itself is bollocks! Apparently to be right wing, is to be racist, homophobic, Islamophobic and to hate disabled people and the welfare state. This of course, is rubbish. Politics does not involve race, sexuality, religion, or physical ability, politics is all to do with ideas.
Besides anything else, if being right wing means being racist, homophobic and Islamophobic, then I've got a problem. As someone who has Muslim friends, black friends, half-Indian siblings, gay friends, gay family members and in general, is an ordinary person surrounded by friends, family and work colleagues from every race, country, religious background, sexuality and range of physical abilities, I resent the automatic assumption, that because I lean to the right in my politics, I automatically want those people in my life to die, or to be hard done by, or forced down, simply put, because I don't.
For me, Nigel Farage sums up UKIP just perfectly when he says "It isn't about right or left, it's about common sense" and this applies to more than just UKIP for me, it is what politics SHOULD be. It shouldn't be about right or left, it should be about what's best, about common sense. To me, it makes perfect sense to have an NHS, which is paid for through taxation, free at the point of use for every citizen and resident of this country. It also makes perfect sense to me, that the state should 'prop up' someone who falls down, the 'safety net' that is intended by our benefit system, makes perfect sense to me. I don't see either of these things as 'left wing' or 'socialist' as some people will insist, I see them as common sense. If someone can only pay taxes and provide a function in society when they are well and able, it makes perfect sense to have a health system that endeavours to make sure that person is well and able, surely? If people living on the street contribute nothing to society, they don't pay taxes, they don't fill a functional role, it makes sense not to let people end up on the street, just because they've had a little blip and ended up out of work, right?
This all might seem straight forward to the reader, but sadly, in this day and age it would appear that in fact, this is all very complex. If you support the NHS, the welfare state, the disabilities act etc. then you're inherently left wing in the eyes of many. Whilst if you also support free markets, privatisation of certain services, getting value for money out of everything you possibly can, you're evil and right wing. So if you support all of the above, what does that make you? Centrist? The simple fact is, most of us in 2014 support the NHS existing in some form or another, most of us support the safety net that is the welfare state, in some form or another, but equally, most of us support going to work and being entitled to pay rises if we work hard, put in the hours and show loyalty to the companies we work for. Most of us support being able to go and buy a 50" LED TV if we've worked hard enough to earn the money to afford one. Pretty much everybody in the country supports the ability to go out and buy an iPhone, or a Samsung Galaxy S, or something of similar calibre. You'd be hard pushed to find anyone on Twitter or Facebook, who doesn't support the ability to use the internet!
Assuming then that most of us are 'centrist', because we believe in the welfare state, the NHS, companies existing to give us jobs, companies existing to flog us TVs and Mobile Phones, why is there this left/right divide? Well, contrary to the belief that the right are evil and the left are lovely, it seems to me that things are in fact the other way around. Those on the right of the spectrum these days, believe in giving everyone who needs it, a helping hand, but equally giving everyone the freedom and opportunity to succeed at their own pace and in their own way. This seems like a pretty 'nice' angle to take on things I feel, because what could be nicer, than helping you when you're down, but equally giving you the freedom to fly when and where you're able? The left on the other hand, to me is the politics of hate. We should hate corporations, we should hate rich people, we should hate anyone who has more than us, EVERYTHING should be run by the state and no one should have more than anyone else. This they say, is in the name of 'fairness'.
So can this be broken down into a simple analogy, to really analyse what is fair and what isn't? Let's turn the whole thing into a running race and see. I'm a fat guy, I'm not very fit and I've never been able to run particularly fast. If I were to enter a running race against someone the same age, but who's fit and able, can run 100 meters in 10 seconds and weighs about 8 stone less than me, I'm going to lose, right? Let's take a look at the way in which the two ends of the spectrum in politics could help me compete in the race.
The right wing way to help me compete in this race, would be to offer me some physical training before the race, help me lose some pounds and teach me how to use my body in the most effective way to compete against my opponent. This means I'm fitter by the time I enter the race, I weigh less and I've got some chance of winning, because whilst I still must run the same distance, I'm better prepared. I actually stand a chance here, of getting to the level of my opponent, even if I don't beat him just yet, I won't be completely humiliated.
Now the left wing way to help me compete in this race, is completely different. They would give my opponent a heavy rucksack to wear during the race, which would bring his total weight, up to my bodyweight. Then, they'd extend his race track by 20 meters or so, untie his shoe laces and make him stop to let me catch up every now and again. The fact is, I'm not getting up to his level here, he's being dragged down to mine. In this race, where he is the person who has the ability, the advantage and in my eyes, every right to win this race, he is either going to lose, or he's barely going to win at all, whilst having broken himself in the process. I on the other hand, as the fat guy with no running ability whatsoever, am not going to be any fitter, lighter or given a fair chance of beating him, I'm not going to be any better off at the end of it, he's just going to be worse off and just isn't going to beat me by as much as he should.
Now this is a very simple analogy I grant you and it ignores lots of other factors, but it does take the methods of the left and the right and simplify them down to something understandable. Everyone has their own gifts and abilities and for me the right way for the human race to proceed through life, is to let everyone use their gifts and abilities to succeed, helping them where needed, picking them up where they fall and encouraging them along the way. For some reason, this huge movement called 'the left' would have us discourage self-improvement, discourage the use of ones skills and abilities to succeed and encourage the crippling of your opponent, in order to have everyone at the same 'fair' level of success. Telling me I'm just not good enough and can never be good enough to beat the other guy, just seems like a bad way to go. Judge for yourself which you think is right, but if the spectrum must be used at all to gauge a persons ideas and beliefs, then I'm very much on the right hand side of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment