Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

Some of my views could certainly be considered 'right wing' in the dictionary sense, but I reject these kind of labels because of the misplaced connotations which often come with them. For instance, in the UK, most right wingers are monarchists- from the Tories, to the right wing rags, Tommy Robinson et al- whereas I am staunchly anti monarchy. Most right wingers are pro austerity, pro war, imperialist elitists- where as I am the antithesis of that. Most right wingers have a somewhat sociopathic attitude towards people of different cultures, religions, races, or ideological persuasions- whereas once again, I do not. What actually constitutes 'right wing' in today's world goes far beyond the dictionary definition, and the same goes for 'left wing'. This is the problem with these kind of labels- you get lumped in with a whole group of people you may have very little in common with ideologically. I have little time for, and little in common with, the left, right, or centre in Britain today. My personal philosophy is radical, but bears little resemblance to anything within the current sociopolitical spectrum. 

Files

Comments

Anonymous

Hey Hatman - I wouldn't call you right wing brother.

Anonymous

Part of the problem is the terms 'left' and 'right', which oversimplify things. The traditional 'far right' we know about were actually Socialist (ie 'left wing') when it came to economic questions. The Nazis were National Socialists, Mussolini started out as a Socialist, the Front Nationale and BNP were Socialists. This is just collectivism painted a different colour, only the basis on which the collective is formed might be race/nation as opposed to class as was the case with the traditional left. Things broke down when 'the left' became hostile to the people who had traditionally voted for them. Any working class person will tell you that people in working men's clubs are at best socially conservative and at worst reactionary. All the LGBT and Transgender stuff has alienated them and I'm not surprised so many turned not so much to voting but sympathising with this 'alt right' thing that has emerged. I disagree with Hatman's philosophy on many levels (as an individualist I would) but it's clear he's at the 'Community' end of the triangle and not the mad Statist one. I have far worse things to worry about than someone like Hatman achieving power. The three pulls worth considering are Individual, State and Community. Where should power reside and what should the balance between the three be? Once you set that up as a triangle and put your X somewhere relative to where you think you stand it makes far more sense than left-right. Statism is on the rise and Communitarians have some common ground with Individualists in feeling somewhat out of the picture these days.

Anonymous

Well simple people get pulled into simple paradigms.They agree with parts of both parties but yet pledge allegiance to one and hate the other-its like one big pantomime and it shows how easily people are controlled and it creates imbalance of the mind. My personal philosophy is what I call feather thought-An idea weighs you down if you put emotional attachment to it and it weighs you down like a brick.If you can hold an idea like a feather and look at it from all angles-you can hold it without it weighing you down and if proves to be "wrong" then you can just blow it away as it weighs nothing-this way your can't be imbalanced