Aidan,

Your Left "fair go to all" uses the 'equality' myth to steal from those who have the money and give it to those who don't. The comrades overlook the fact that wealth has to be earned, and those who have not earned it have no right to the wealth of others. Give people money, and they will blow it all quickly, and come back for more. They don't appreciate it if it is free of effort on their part.

The Left idea of equality would see us all equal, alright: all broke, because the rich would soon stop producing money to give to bludgers. Your sort of system no longer exists. It has been tried and failed.

ttbn,

That's a very common myth used by those on the right to discredit the left, but if you consider it carefully you'll see it's mainly false.

Firstly, the left generally aren't calling for much more direct redistribution of wealth than there is now. Certainly not enough to destroy the incentive to work.

Secondly, those who are paying and those who are receiving are usually the same people in different stages of life.

Thirdly, of course wealth has to be earned, and there is a lot the government can do to enable and assist the population to do more high value work.

So while I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "Your sort of system", I know it's not what I advocate.

The main objective of the left is for the government to provide better services. Do you have a problem with that?

__________________________________________________________________________________

Loudmouth,

Where they live when they're in power doesn't actually address Hasbeen's question.

Tyrants tend to pretty quickly lose any ideology they start off with. As for the current Chinese leaders, they're all thoroughly corrupt. But remember, they joined the Chinese Communist Party not because of any leftist moral basis, but because it was the only legal political party in the country.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Hasbeen,

I previously said:
I can't off hand name any political leader, left or right, who departed any office poorer than he entered it.

I've now thought of one: Clive Palmer (who was leader of the Palmer United Party).

A very good article by Don Aitken,questioning what reality the
ideology of the left and those with similar ideas on the right base
their beliefs on.

This idea they have of a new world order, the quaint idea of a global
village, where humans will live for evermore in love peace and harmony.

How do they think, they alone, in the space of their short lifespans as compared
to the 1,000,s of years of humans who went before them can bring this about.

If it was that easy to do, the wars, and the individual human search for prosperity,
(snouts in the trough), would have stopped by now.
But these people think they have such amazing ability, and assumed intellectual supremacy ,and understanding
that they alone in history, can change human nature and behaviour-after all this time.
This article points out that they have no reasonable premise for believing they can bring this about.

Dear Aidan,

«The moral basis of the Left is a fair go for everyone.»

Even for cows, sheep, chicken and pigs?

Once you stop eating them, then I may be inclined to believe.

However, this approach for humans to wilfully attempt to achieve a fair go, is short-sighted. Considering the long term, FAIR GO is already here, including for these poor animals. The problem is that some people believe that God is not managing the situation well enough, that they can do it better...

«Firstly, the left generally aren't calling for much more direct redistribution of wealth than there is now.»

Yes, indirect, covert redistribution, robbing people's hard-earned savings through inflation is now more in fashion.

«Secondly, those who are paying and those who are receiving are usually the same people in different stages of life.»

This is, assuming the potential recipients are depraved enough to accept money that was taken from others against their will. The end result is, those honourable people with a moral spine paying to support those without.

«Thirdly, of course wealth has to be earned, and there is a lot the government can do to enable and assist the population to do more high value work.»

Similar. Only those who are willing to take other people's money that was taken off them involuntarily may accept such "assistance", a short-term assistance as such, before they end up burning in hell for it.

Also, "high value work" rarely has anything to do with good work. Chances are that while more money will flow, less happiness will result.

<<The main objective of the left is for the government to provide better services. Do you have a problem with that?>>

Definitely. Government provides the above services using money taken from others without their consent. Benefiting from any such services is therefore an immoral act of theft/robbery.

Aiden,
I think the modern day democracy 'tyrant' will be a banking administrator and austerity, leading to the complete destruction of sovereignty, open borders, police state and a global government run the banking elite in league with large corporations.

I was following a compass that turned towards the Left, until they wanted boys to use the girls toilets.

And they wanted men to marry other men.

And they wanted fathers to be replaced by sperm donors in an IVF clinic.

And they started calling Islam a race.

And they started saying that someone who is born in Australia to Asian parents, and now speaks with an Australian accent and has never been to an Asian country is multicultural.

And so on.