Why do europeans vote for the left?

Discussion in 'Western Europe' started by Munqi, Feb 28, 2012.

  1. Paris

    Paris Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You should add some bread with your bitter.
     
  2. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Democrats were in power of finances and were playing politics with the economic system. You don't seem to understand that the President of the U.S. is not a dictator. This is part of why Euros can't understand America because of wrong-headed thinking and just plain ignorance. Hey Euros...Most Americans are not like you at all. We are self-sufficient and strongly in favor of individual freedom. We do not think the State is our mommy or daddy. The few radical lefties that wrangled themselves into power are also socialist and their policies are the reason for the market downturn. I showed you and proved it. You either refuse to accept reality or maybe just a bit ignorant of the facts. Obama has the same mindset as the radical lefties and his carrying on of those policies has caused America to go to the brink of financial collapse.
     
  3. janpor

    janpor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    9,046
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Guys,...

    The American is annoying me like hell -- since he is spouting nothing more than obvious lies.

    Let us ignore him. Thanks, regards, Jan.

    BTW guys -- HAPPY LABOUR DAY!

    I know, I know -- it's only tommorrow, but I'm guessing most of y'all are home today as well. I am! ,) and it is great weather, sunny and it will get really warm today as well! :clap:
     
  4. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The TRUTH is often annoying to those who cannot face it. Euros are America 'wannabes' but since most of Europe has been steeped in socialist dogma and are regarded only as 'subjects' of the ruling class for thousands of years they just don't understand what true freedom is all about. With freedom comes responsibility for ones own life. Most of US do not like the omnipotent State the way Euros do.
     
  5. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,329
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That is, of course, complete and total nonsense. Most of the people of Europe have not been mere 'subjects' for quite while now (many of them had actual violent revolutions, in fact), and they fully understand what 'true freedom' is - in fact, concepts like 'freedom' and 'democracy' were invented in Europe, and by Europeans. Unfortunately, some don't seem to understand that such things actually exist outside the US!
     
    ryanm34 and (deleted member) like this.
  6. Viv

    Viv Banned by Request

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    8,174
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Most Scots are socialist. Some posters here think I'm unusual, but here nobody votes Right.

    An opinion which differs from yours constitutes bitterness now. Righto.

    I am not bitter at all. In this culture, people have seen what happens if the needlessly wealthy are not forced to contribute. Even so, they are still at it and have been recently detected avoiding taxes every way they can, despite the country being up (*)(*)(*)(*) creek without a paddle. I pay my taxes. If people want to live in this society, they are expected to pay too. Making a fool of the system they take their money from is not on.

    What age do you think I am? I'm probably older than you. Even so, you can't have missed the economic crisis RPA's reckless rich wrought on the rest of the world and you must know the country needs all the money it can rake in at the moment. So if you don't mind, the taxes we pay will have to go into that at the moment, instead of into the ipad fund. Although that doesn't apply to the rich, they think, because they manipulate their tax year to avoid paying increased tax rates while still wanting to trade and live here free of responsibility. I don't like that. It's a matter of principle, they should be nailed for it and more severely than they otherwise would have been, to teach them not to make a fool of the people.

    So it was the Righties then.:crazy: I understand your political system and remember the Right lunatic fringe abusing it to almost destroy your country's economy as the financial world watched your President battle to get the debt plan approved. I don't accept the reverse caused the economic crisis. Republican negligence did that.

    I like your use of the word "labour". You'd think they would only have a capitalist day and erase the word labour from their vocabulary as a dirty red word.

    Americans are Euros. The people who struggled to severe relations with UK were UK. Any of us who wanted to be Americans could have been Americans. We are too cool to by yankified thank you.

    Whatever you do, don't tell him we had an revolution, murdered our own King, installed a man of the people who was a Puritan like the yankee folks, had a go at living like Puritans, decided that was a lot of insipid nonsense and dragged our King back across the water to reinstall him as he was so much more colourful and entertaining than old Puritan roundheads. And definitely don't mention how we then kicked his poor brother out on his backside for subscribing to a religion which wanted to rule us from abroad. Or how Royal powers are curtailed, to make the Royals effectively just a bit of fun.
     
  7. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Americans are many generations removed from Euros. Our Founders left because of Socialist religious repression. Most of you 'over there' didn't have the guts to seek individual freedom at the time. Once America was established and prosperous beyond all expectations, you guys decided to come here for a better life and you learned how to be Americans.

    Yet you STILL revere your royals and are their subjects. Perhaps its easier to for you to give up your independence than to have to depend on yourselves?

    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. That is nothing but gibberish. I already told you it was the Democrat-Socialist-Lefties that caused this, explained it to you and provided examples. I must conclude you either cannot comprehend or are purposely ignoring the truth.
     
  8. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,329
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That is materially inaccurate in the extreme in almost every way. The UK was certainly not 'Socialist' in any way at the formation of the USA - such a system had not even been concieved, and would certainly not have been entertained by the political leaders or the population at the time. 'Socialism' of a kind perhaps played some part in the industrial revolution period through the 19th centuries in struggles for basic worker rights, but as a significant political force really began in the UK in the 20th century with the rise of the Labour party. It pretty much dies as a major political force at the end of the 1970's.

    When it came to the founding of the US, the ideals they chose were the liberal ones which had come over from Europe, as opposed to the conservative post-feudal essentially aristocratic modeal and ideas on which the UK essentially ran at the time. The UK, of course, has long since abandoned those old ways, and has been a liberal democracy for some time with occasional dabbles with some forms of socialism in the last century, which generally didn't go very well and were more or less abondoned (with only one or two elements which were maintained in modified form, purely because they actually worked!).

    The pilgrim founders also didn't leave because of religious repression - they left because they were of a particularly puritanical and repressive ilk themselves, but were not able to have the effective political power to repress others because of their own restrictive religious ideals. They were religious extremists looking for a home for their new cult where they could dictate the rules for everyone according to their religious beliefs, and they weren't allowed to do such a thing at that time in the UK so they wen't elsewhere to do it. They were puritans - exactly the kind of people who were thrown out of power in favour of bringing the monarch back after the post civil war period. The UK has resoundingly chosen freedom of thought and worship in favour of religious oppression for a couple of centuries now, and continues to do so - that is why we don't have the problems of religious block voting, and extremist religious lunatics like Santorum coming to such prominance, within our political system.

    Perhaps one day the repressive religious conservatives that are such a political force in the USA will learn about secular politics and real freedom of thought and choice for every individual in society, instead of shouting so much about their supposed 'freedom' that they only want to apply to those who think and worship exactly the same way as they do! Thankfully in the UK we learned from our brief experience of government by such puritanical religious extremists, and decided to never go back there, prefering instead to have real individual freedom of conscience and thought for everyone, whether or not they conform to and obey the dictats of petty religious dictators.

    Again complete nonsense. The people of the UK are no longer 'subjects' of the royals, and in practical terms haven't been for centuries. That system began a process of change after that aforementioned civil war and through the following centuries, to the point that the aristocratic system of government ceased to exist completely by early in the 20th century. Some people really like the royals, of course, some really dislike them, but the overwhelming majority of people are pretty much indifferent to them, because they have no real relevance anymore (apart from a bit of traditional ceremonial pomp, and being an interesting attraction for tourists). NOBODY actually 'reveres' them - that's just rubbish, with no basis in fact or reality. They are now viewed by the general population with a mix of amusement, disdain and the kind of vague affection in which are held scabby, ugly, smelly and occasionally vicious old dogs that have little of merit going for them, but despite that are still long-serving family companions who nobody really wants to have put to sleep!
     
  9. janpor

    janpor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    9,046
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    => "Socialist religious repression" => LMAO! => Seriously? In the the 17th century? :laughing:

    Anyways -- HAPPY LABOUR DAY EVERYONE!
     
  10. raymondo

    raymondo Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,296
    Likes Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Have you ever done an honest day's work yet?
     
  11. janpor

    janpor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    9,046
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Uhm,...

    Every day, my colleagues and I make sure that half of Belgium doesn't explode ~ so I guess it's better you keep quite little man.
     
  12. RPA1

    RPA1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    22,806
    Likes Received:
    1,269
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Working for a King is in actuality working for the collective with a central government mandate. The only thing different between a monarchy and socialism is the name.

    The UK still has royalty and is not a democracy. It is a socialist State and always has been. The Pilgrims actually applied Socialist principles when they arrived with collectively owned land and shared produce. The first year they nearly starved. After that, individual land ownership and keeping one's own produce was instituted, the rest is history.

    Good gawd...Is that what they are teaching UK kids these days? Revisionist history at best, outright lies at worst. So we are to believe that because of the lack of political power the Pilgrims risked their lives on an ocean voyage to come to a new world in order to 'dictate rules' to the other Euros that weren't even here then? If that is true, then why aren't Americans all Pilgrims now?

    Unlike the in the UK, there is no State religion in the U.S. In America everyone has the right to practice the religion of their choice. While the majority in the U.S. are Christian, there is no 'Church of America' and never will be as long as the constitution isn't undermined and/or removed. The fact that certain groups of religious folks gather together and vote their conscience is not an indication of any church/State alliance.


    Nope, under English common law, the Crown has 'radical title' which means that the Crown is the ultimate owner of all land. The Crown grants an 'estate in land' which is what is owned rather than the land itself. 'The People' own nothing.

    In the U.S. law is similar in that land can be owned in 'fee simple' however since there is no 'Crown' the people own all the land and in the U.S. there is no special wording needed to create an inheritance.
     
  13. Colonel K

    Colonel K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The pilgrims were slitting tongues for dancing on the Sabbath within a few years of landing in their little Jonestowns. There were more economic migrants on the "Mayflower than people with any connection whatever to Scroby.

    NSFW

    [video=youtube;aJYY1CFKzTg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJYY1CFKzTg[/video]
     
  14. mutmekep

    mutmekep New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    6,223
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have not follow the discussion , I vote left because i am a communist .
    People living outside Europe are not Europeans.
    Every time i read about creationism , abortions , nations under god , races in state statistics , exceptionalism , Marx made equal to Stalin, frothy mixes , buried golden plates , islamofascists, old Europe, homosexuality as a sin , tea parties , acts of valour , libertarianism , stand your ground laws and the death penalty i go out and celebrate Columbus day .
     
  15. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,329
    Likes Received:
    235
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Call it what you like, it happens to be the truth! The pilgrims left because they were hardcore puritans in what they saw as a 'sinful' place, where they did not have the power to dictate that everyone in society should live according to their puritanical ideals. They were not being repressed - nobody was stopping them from living their lives how they wanted to, but merely stopping them from forcing everyone around them to live the same way. They left to form their own puritanical community, away from the 'sinners', where everyone had to conform. I'm not criticising that particularly - good luck to 'em in forming their new community for themselves, I say - claiming that they were being repressed before they left, though, is simply untrue. Of course, once masses of others arrived on the continent who didn't think the same way, their little community of puritanism certainly didn't survive and prosper in its pure form as a universal society across the whole continent! New incomers viewed no doubt viewed their extremist ideas with the same contempt that most people had for it in the land that they had left. Their ideas did persist in society to an extent, though, and have left a legacy of fairly extreme puritanical thinking in some areas, and one which doesn't really exist in any other part of the 'Christian' world (and hasn't since the Britain's brief flirtation with it around the Civil War period).

    There is no 'state religion' in the UK. There is an 'established church', in one part of it, which is not the same thing at all. There are no restrictions on religious worship in the UK, and everyone is free to worship (or not) any religion they choose, or attend any church, chapel, temple, mosque, synagogue, woodland glade, sacred spring or other religious site they want to. Politics and government in the UK is, of course, pretty much entirely secular in practise. Despite there being an 'established church' which many still belong to, unlike many US churches and pastors it doesn't involve itself directly in party politics or voting, and there is no religious block voting at all (from any religion). Religion is seen entirely as a matter of personal conscience, and a matter of belief for the individual - it's not something that intrudes into politics, economics, etc., and it's not something that generally interferes with daily life or social interaction. Religion is many, many times more significant and important in politics and society in the US than it is in the UK, even though the US doesn't have an 'established' or 'unified' church - the UK simple does not have the same kind of mainstream or significant 'Christian conservative' or puritanical element in its society, and there are no mainstream 'preachers' of any sort telling people how to vote (or telling them, in 'fire and brimstone' and 'hell and (*)(*)(*)(*)ation' terms, that they can be 'saved' if they send cash to pay for the preacher's brand new Rolls Royce, for that matter - priests and vicars, especially from the C of E and its dis-established Anglican associates, are generally a pretty mild-mannered and unassuming bunch, usually concerned with helping people in trouble, holding little fetes and jumble sales, saving the 1000 year old roof of their church building from collapse, and having a quiet pint in the local hostelry to 'keep them in touch with their parishoners'!).

    Is it really believed in the US that the people of the UK aren't able to actually own private property?!! You can. I do. Property ownership is no different in the UK to the US. There is no 'special wording' needed to 'create an inheritance', either - that's just nonsense. When I die, my property/assets will pass automatically to my next of kin (or to be divided between my next of kin, if there's more than one of them), unless I specify how I want it divided via a will, of course. Unclaimed inheritance can eventually end up in the hands of the government, to be used alongside taxpayers money, but only if there has been no will and there are no living relatives that can be found to claim it within 12 years (and there are independant companies who's specific job is to look for potential inheritors of any unclaimed money - all unclaimed inheritance lists are accessible by them and by the public).
     

Share This Page