The U.S. Politics thread - turd sandwich it is


I’m Moderate Conservative, which is a bit pointless living in London.

I believe in limited government and empowering business through deregulation and low taxes even though I voted to remain in the EU and believed it in.

You’d never catch me voting for Corbyn’s Labour ever. His policies and ideals are ‘bloated’


That’s seems pretty debatable to me. Fascism is a friend of big business, no? Fascism is insular and nationalistic whereas socialism in the broadest sense is internationalist and about class solidarity rather than national solidarity. I might be ignorant of the history but the two don’t seem hugely compatible.

Even if I’m wrong about the link between the two, this is why the political model I posted is useful imo. It doesn’t place fascism and socialism automatically at opposite ends because the authoritarian/libertarian axis allows for more nuance, and can illustrate similarities between seemingly opposite parties/figures etc.

I’d appreciate some links to decent reading on the subject :+1:

Well that much was obvious from what you wrote right beforehand :smile:


As long as big business does what the state says. Yes.


I think people are confussed by the fact that good old Benito started his political career as a socialist (in a time where communism and socialism where pretty much the same).

There are many differences between the classical pre-WWII fascism and how fascism is seen now.

And big business is okay with the whole autarky thing.


All this ever means in reality is multi million/billion pound/euro enterprises operating in such a way that they pay the minimal amount of tax and, in the most case, that money lines the pockets of people who already have more money than they could ever spend already.

And yes that includes Arsenal.

I’m not saying I have a definitely better solution but I don’t believe that way of doing things is to the benefit of society as a whole.


I was hoping for more if I’m honest


I guess this is a contenious issue which faces the UK - I invite other to shre their view.

My focus is on smaller National / Regional / Local business tbh. Regulation of Multinationals is a different ball game entirely which requires a different approach and legislation.

Of course there’s an reasonable amount expected to be due in taxes but generally I don’t think you should penalise business for being successful.

I believe the alternative will not provide an environment where prospective business and new small business owners have faith in the UK market. Especially in a post Brexit environment where we’ll need to seriously compete to keep and attract business without the economic benefits the EU offers.

The situation going on with Nissan in the North East is something which I was afraid off and it why I voted to remain. The subsidy is unreasonable government intervention motivated by a desperation to keep them here because of the future implications of Brexit.

Actively persecuting companies through aggressive anti ‘loophole’ legislation and maintaining a higher tax rate on companies will simply drive business to the EU.

#712 is much more eloquent that I am so I’ll quote them:

"Many political philosophies called fascism in retrospect (Austrofascism, Spanish National Catholicism, etc.) were just radicalized, populist spins on conservatism. There were two exceptions to this: Italian fascism and Nazism.

Mussolini was originally a democratic socialist, and his original fascism started out as a right-wing spin on this. He continued to accept the idea of class struggle, although changing his ideas on how to end it: for him, it could be ended by all the classes within a certain country working together (“class collaboration”). This unification of classes was to be brought about by emphasizing a shared national heritage; in Italy’s case, recalling the days of the Roman Empire. In this way, the fascist program shares many similarities with social conservatism, but the two philosophies approach the question from different angles, social conservatives seeing the preservation of a traditional or pseudo-traditional social order as an end in itself, fascism seeing it as a means to a further end.

Hitler’s Nazism also saw the nation (in his case, racially defined) as a unifying point, but instead of viewing this as a solution to the class issue, he saw it as a means of opposing the perceived machinations of “Jewish” communists, bankers and businessmen (yes, he imagined there was a conspiracy between communists and bankers, based on their common Jewishness), and promoting the interests of “pure-blooded” German people. Nazi ideology insisted very strongly on race-based policies and the need for unity among members of the “Aryan race”, to the exclusion of everything else (such as individual interests or class interests). Thus, Nazism positioned itself against socialists and communists who focused on class, and also against liberal capitalists who focused on the individual."

They’ve done a good job of arguing that Fascism takes elements of both, but tend to lean left in that the state and not the individual should control the economy and social order.


I get what @NeedCoffee said about fascism. Mussolini was part of a group of socialists who wanted to fight in the First World War, while the whole socialism was against it. When The Great War ended he formed a group called “Arditi”. It was composed by former militaries and was inspired by revolutionary socialism. When this group switched to the far right to take the power Arditi splited into two parts: Arditi d’Italia (far right) and Arditi del Popolo (far left).


I don’t find this particularly eloquent or insightful to be honest.

“radicalized, populist spins on conservatism”
“Mussolini was originally a democratic socialist, and his original fascism started out as a right-wing spin on this.”

There’s a lot of spinning on, and very little explaining.
These vague assertions continue throughout the article:

"These tactics have been carried pretty far, as mentioned above, with “fascist” becoming a general insult or accusation hurled around loosely, usually inappropriately and often childishly, to criticise anyone or anything we find even slightly overbearing or restrictive."
This is nothing but opinion (by someone we don’t know), it is subjective and not supported by any evidence. Not a source we should turn to for definitions of political concepts (or any definitions, for that matter).


Hillary isnt left wing and neither was Obama . They remind me of New Labour ,morally bankrupt oppportunists . Im not a Trump fan but Im glad she lost. At least theres a chance of real change under Trump although who that change will help remains to be seen. People are sick of politicians raping them . Its why Corbyn is head of labour its why people voted for brexit and its why trump got in too.


Obama’s economic policy is left-wing. In fact the USA is growing so well under him.


You’re talking about specific things to the UK, which I don’t know a great deal about so please excuse that I’m quoting a specific part of your post here…

Why is it seen an penalising? The government charges individuals up to 50%? in tax of their earnings just for having a good job but the job provider who is earning even more often pays considerably less in tax once they’ve jumped through a few avoidance loopholes. I just feel that whats good on an individual level should also apply to businesses. I also accept that unfortunately that’s simply not realistic/going to happen but I live in hope.


There were a few questions that I found contradicting myself and some I would have liked a not sure answer but this is what I got.
A bit more left than I thought I would be.
I have similar views to a lot of my friends, so it seems quite strange that this questionnaire shows we are more left than middle of the road.


Grouping fascism and socialism :facepalm:

Must be for use in U.S. poli sci classes.


Talk about Obama not being left-wing. The GOP are making all the poor people happy.


Some of the questions on these things can be terribly frustrating though ha.


I gave up on that matrix.
I realised that I should not talk about Politics because I cringe at every ideology.

I am a firm believer of Depends-ology.


Well the logic behind taxation of individual citizens and businesses has always been distinct from each other with different philosophies behind each one. It’s unreasonable to transfer the logic tbh

It’s seen as penalising because we rely on businesses to propel our economy through free market principles, reducing the amount they can earn post tax diminishes economic incentive and stifles thier growth and in turn the expansion of our economy as a whole on all levels.

Current government policy generally rewards businesses for investing thier profits back into their bussiness. Why? Because it encourages growth that is beneficial to everyone. Personal payments like high wages and dividends are taxed pretty heavily already.

The truth is local/regional/national companies rarely ever exploit loopholes to avoid paying tax. They lack the resources or scope to do it and you’d be very surprised how meticulous HMRC are about collecting thier due. A higher tax on their earnings affects thier growth when this level of business needs our support more than ever. Reducing the amount they pay in tax allows them to expand their operations, hire new staff and further invest in Britain.

Your view makes the UK and very unattractive place for businesses to invest in. I mean who enjoys the idea of an overbearing government eating away at your hard earned profits? In an increasingly global world with Brexit in mind it’s economic suicide to make the UK market uncomfortable for investors or diminished confidence in the UK market. If anything the UK will need to bend over backwards in years to come rather than taking a robust position on corporate taxation.


Breitbart is a cancer on democracy.