Bruce Dickinson on BBC Radio 4 "Any Questions" (2nd November)

[Deleted member 7164]

Also important to point out that the left-right spectrum includes both economic and social policies, which is the reason why it's unnecessarily complicated and counterproductive. If an ideology that's centrist economically tends to be more progressive on social issues, their placement on the spectrum tilts to the left a bit. Such is the case with social liberals. If an ideology that's right-wing economically tends to be progressive on social issues, their placement on the spectrum tilts to the center a bit. Such is the case with libertarians.

Then again you have spectrum width which is country-specific, where a spectrum might be so narrow or so wide that it distorts these traditional labels and requires re-categorization. These things are harder to classify than metal music...

That's an unreasonable statement to make.

But it is normal for me, isn't it? Automatically I presume if someone wants to tell me how to live he ain't normal and I don't want him around. Keep in mind where I'm from, and when someone from Balkans says 'I'm not liberal', you can automatically presume he wants to take freedoms away from somebody.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

I think it's pretty clear that social liberals care more about providing people a safety net than right-wing liberals do.

You sure about that?
Right-wing liberals also want to provide people a safety net, just for the other group of people.

Let's be clear here - all I'm saying, a budget reshuffle isn't worth all-public political wars.

 

[The Flash]

But it is normal for me, isn't it? Automatically I presume if someone wants to tell me how to live he ain't normal and I don't want him around.

Well if you assume your own views are supposed to be held as the universal standard no matter what what goes on around the planet, I don't know what to tell you. You can't just remove yourself from the global political context. And I said, "liberalism" literally came into existence because that sentiment wasn't the "normal" thing.

You sure about that?
Right-wing liberals also want to provide people a safety net, just for the other group of people.

I thought it was clear which group of people I was talking about.

Let's be clear here - all I'm saying, a budget reshuffle isn't worth all-public political wars.

If the elements of that "budget reshuffle" are done with a clear motive in mind and that motive is central to the ideology, it's a distinct ideology.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

I want to hold "stay out of my life" definitely as an universal standard. If someone goes there without my permission I will defend it even outside legal bounds. Agreed on your last sentence but that surely wasn't the case with UK (and the topic is about that I think). Surely, it would be ideological to pump up the billions and billions freed after Brexit to NHS, if such money existed. But it doesn't.

 

[The Flash]

I want to hold "stay out of my life" definitely as an universal standard.

That's precisely the point. You want to hold it as the universal standard, it isn't necessarily the universal standard, at least as of right now. You said

I also won't accept the social category of "liberal". If I don't care what you fuck or how you spend your life, if I think that's your right to do so as you wish, that doesn't make me a liberal, that makes me a normal person.

You might want to avoid the word liberal, but in this context, you are a liberal person. As long as there are authoritarian ideologies around, that distinction will remain.

Agreed on your last sentence but that surely wasn't the case with UK (and the topic is about that I think).

It originated as a UK-specific discussion, but drifted to a general political theory discussion after Per's post. So I wasn't talking about the UK.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

Ya ok. I don't mind being referred to as liberal anyways.

 

[Operations666]

Just FYI, the conservative-liberal binary is essentially meaningless outside the US.

Call it nationalist vs. globalist, or whatever you want. The terminology may change, but the divide is real between those who desire greater individual freedom and those who desire greater centralized control over their and others’ lives.

My point was that Bruce seems to have a foot on each side of the fence. A lot of us do.

 

[Perun]

The terminology may change, but the divide is real between those who desire greater individual freedom and those who desire greater centralized control over their and others’ lives.

[citation needed]

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

I want to hold "stay out of my life" definitely as an universal standard. If someone goes there without my permission I will defend it even outside legal bounds.

So, how far do you defend this? And "your life" includes what exactly?

 

[LooseCannon]

I want the government to have more control over businesses and less control over my personal life choices. What am I?

 

[Brigantium]

divide is real between those who desire greater individual freedom and those who desire greater centralized control over their and others’ lives.

The political spectrum isn't as simple as a sliding scale between authoritarian and libertarian, though, there's at least one other dimension to it. The central control v freedom debate is just what seems to be the most publicly debated issue in the US. Looking at politics as a simple sliding scale results in miscategorising of political standpoints and misconceptions about them.

Gun ownership is rarely equated with personal freedom or fundamental citizens' rights in the UK. It's just not an issue. Gun-proud culture and gun crime, especially school shootings, absolutely horrifies a lot of people over here.

Although he likes to make cheeky pops at symbols of traditional authority, Bruce's political views are probably best aligned with the comfortably-off business professionals set, those people who form the grass-roots membership of the Conservative party, which is generally happy with authority and central control (ideally as long as it's used to protect their current lot in life). That's about as establishment as you can get.

 

[Brigantium]

I want the government to have more control over businesses and less control over my personal life choices. What am I?

Canadian.

 

[Operations666]

I want the government to have more control over businesses and less control over my personal life choices. What am I?

Probably a conservative. Unchecked corporate power is as dangerous as unchecked government power. But for your idea to work, you need a government that is trustworthy and accountable. Otherwise what happens is that government, while pretending to "regulate" big business, just becomes a partner in crime with big business. You see this in the US where government regulators and corporate executives cycle in and out of government and private industry, enriching themselves and rigging the system for their own benefit while pretending to serve the people.

Ultimately the people are the only real check on such abuse of power, which is why the 2nd Amendment exists. Any centralized power structure is inherently subject to corruption and can never be absolutely trusted.

 

[The Flash]

LOL at calling LC a conservative.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

So, how far do you defend this? And "your life" includes what exactly?

This is a philosophical question, I don't think you're ready for it before version 4.2

 

[LooseCannon]

Probably a conservative.

I don't consider myself a conservative (or a Conservative) in any sense of the word. I support government-run essential services and strict regulation on businesses. I'm definitely not an American-style conservative!

 

[Operations666]

I don't consider myself a conservative (or a Conservative) in any sense of the word. I support government-run essential services and strict regulation on businesses. I'm definitely not an American-style conservative!

Okay. But my point stands that that approach only works if government is accountable and trustworthy. Do you trust the Canadian government? Do they really represent your best interests? That's for you to decide.

It's in the American DNA to distrust government, which is why we cling to our guns and Bibles (as Obama said).

 

[The Flash]

I don't think you're any style of conservative, LC.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

Not even LooselyConservative

 

[LooseCannon]

Okay. But my point stands that that approach only works if government is accountable and trustworthy. Do you trust the Canadian government?

"Trust" is a varying term, though. I trust government functionaries to show up and execute the policy given to them faithfully, absolutely. If the elected officials set policy A, I expect the vast majority of government workers to execute policy A. Of course, some people are fuckups, some people are dishonest, and some people make mistakes, but in general, I trust the mechanics of government to execute the policies given to them.

What I do not trust are the motivations of politicians, and I certainly don't trust that politicians are always going to institute policies that are for the general benefit. But that's why we have elections - to call those politicians to account. In addition, I am an active member in my democracy - I write my MP, my MPP, the Premier, the Prime Minister, various ministers, etc. So I think that piece works properly.

Do they really represent your best interests?

This is the part I find really interesting. I don't believe government exists to benefit me. It exists to benefit the whole body of Canadians as best as possible. As a Canadian, I get some of these benefits, but I fully expect my government to take actions that will benefit other groups of Canadians to the exclusion of me. If I look at the vast majority of government spending, what actually affects me? Health care spending affects me some, but most of it isn't spent on me or things that will ever affect me. Building safe water supplies in northern Canada doesn't affect me. Spending money to help out small struggling nations doesn't affect me. But I *want* my government to do those things, because they make my country (and the world) a better place.

It's in the American DNA to distrust government, which is why we cling to our guns and Bibles (as Obama said).

It's been my honest observation that Americans cling to guns & the Bible because they don't like ceding power elsewhere, and those things make them (illogically) feel like they retain more power.