Daily Mail

You can have it whatever way you want but i will go by what the results of "marxists" in power rather than theorising. i suepect many of them came to power promising thsi and that (didnt lenin?) and guess what?

Either way there is no way on earth that Marxists are in favour of enterprise
 
Hamm said:
Who said they had?!!
Click to expand...

Which pretty well mean that's his Marxist beliefs didn't exactly extend across the electorate did they? No more than le pens beliefs ? (Probably less)

And given that Marxism is a compete dead duck and not on anyone's radar even after the supposed collapse of capitalism that we have experienced. Well..

He may have had some influence here and there but not his core politics.
 
Grasshopper said:
Milliband's father could have been Santa or The Tooth Fairy - they have about as much relevance to Ed's political outlook.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. A game of salesmanship and one-upmanship is what al the leaders are involved in. If Ed Milliband does lean towards the left if will only be to ensure he gets in power.

Grasshopper said:
It doesn't matter that Ralph Milliband was a frothing Marxist. Ed himself is a soft-left social-liberal.
Click to expand...

On that note you might say Cameron is a soft-liberal-tory! I think these descriptions are predominantly based on presentation and perception than any real ideology that's there. I think to give any of the leaders these days any type of ideoligically-based gravitas gives them too much credit, myself.

The same goes for Blair...left wing on immigration and welfare, but far-right on foreign policy. I don't think the modern day leaders studied their own political ideologies that hard, and Margaret Thatcher aside, every prime minister since her controversial-self has been either ideologically numb or too concerned with presentation, social media, etc.

I think thats just the ways it evolved, and its hard to even comment on it without in someway having to take part in it, (for those who definately are against it: see Gordon Brown 'substance-over-presentation supporters).
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Grasshopper View Post
Milliband's father could have been Santa or The Tooth Fairy - they have about as much relevance to Ed's political outlook.

Careful Grassy: The Mail might pick this up. Headline:

"Milliband's father was a gummy queer who sneaked into children's bedrooms every winter!"
 
Bar the Bull said:
Sartre was much more influential politically than Milliband Sr.

To suggest being Marxist means you favour suppression of freedom of exprssion is horsesh1t.
Click to expand...

Well I will admit I go this a bit wrong and was slow off the mark... For once

I should have hammered this crap post the moment I saw it.

Satre was a lifelong supporter of the soviet system. Seemingly he disliked certain extreme elements of it such as invasions and executions but In Principle the lack of

Free press
Free speech
Free enterprise

Was just fine by him.

No one who believed in any of he above basic rights would have touched stalins state with a barge pole
 
Last edited:
Clive, you should read on the break in friendship between Sartre and Camus, you would enjoy it (genuinely).
 
It's completely backfired on the Mail. In fact if anything it has probably given ed a chance to get in the public realm and play it for all its worth. No reason why he shouldn't either

Stupidity
 
The MoS editor's quick action (full apology and suspension of the journos involved) actually casts him in a much better light than double-down Dacre, making the latter's position even more difficult.
 
I agree with you Clive that Sartre was a geebag. He was not a very "practical" man (few Marxists are). However, much as I dislike the pompous git, he did criticise the Soviet Union repeatedly for its suppression of free expression and free speech. He was a "supporter" in earlier periods of the USSR, but how could those things be "just fine by him" when he called them out on them repeatedly?

Sartre struggled with the Soviet Union, but gradually the scales fell from his eyes. However, given that existentialism values free will and the the existentialist expects people to respect others' freedom, the ethical system developed by Sartre is based upon free expression. At the heart of his works is the inalienable rights of people to express their thoughts.

He struggled with marrying his beliefs with what was (and which he eventually recognised to be) an impure realisation of the Marxist dream in the USSR.

The row between he and Camus that Hamm refers to concerns these issues.
 
Well if that's what his extraterrestial views stood for then why the **** did it take him 40 years to work out that stalin was not nick clegg ?

He "struggled " with the soviet union. Poor dear. So did a few million others too.
 
It doesnt take a "fine mind" to work out that one system had to block borders and build walls to keep people in and the other had to do the same to keep people out

There were few reports of americans begging at the to be allowed to live in the gulags were there? The soviet union didnt exactly have an immigration problem did it?

******* obvious to the whole word ..except so called intellectuals who (as is generally the case on the far left) believe that they know whats best for everyone, dismissive of peoples aspirations and freedoms and are contemptuous of the bleeding obvious
 
Last edited:
Bar the Bull said:
Christ, Clive. Everything is left or right with you. It's like being in Civics class in school again. I don't like Sartre much. But if you think he opposed freedom of expression, I despair.
Click to expand...


Look one last time. He backed a political system that suppressed freedom of expression to the extent millions were executed for not holding the'wrong views '....against one that didn't

That's how much it meant to him.

You brought satre into this as a supposed example of a Marxist who backed freedom of speech. Doesn't sit too well with his long term backing of Stalin does it?

End of







Walworth. The difference between the far fascistic right and th far left is minimal. As we now see with the far lefts fawning over hard right wing fascistic imans... Agree
 
Last edited:
Clive, why do you always have such entrenched views about things you know little about? Your last post shows yet again you haven't a clue about Sartre, his life and beliefs. That's fine, but don't then continue posting as you do - you are making yourself look a tit.
 
Last edited:
And the point of draining each others energy on debates that cannot be won lost or drawn in eyes of each individual is.................?

I think there's a lot of good to have come from internet forums but people looking for gratification and superiority is not one.

The old joke on TRF was that the place should not turn into the United Nations.....
 
Last edited:
Back
Top