Daily Mail readers

[anotheoldgit]

One regular reads on AB that The Daily Mail is a Right Wing lowlife rag, full of crap etc etc.

Can it be any different to the Left Wing rags? These also must put forward their own political leaningsin their news stories. So how is one any better than the other? Is the one called the 'Independent' truly independant? I don't think so somehow.

Which promps me to ask, why is it OK to be Left-Wing but frown upon to be Right-Wing. Lets face it, the left are actually communists by nature, who will at the drop of a hat, take to the streets in force, to protest against any Right -Wing group's presence, or anything else they can find to disagree with.

These Left-Wing groups often rallying under the banners of the 'Socialist Workers Party' & 'Anti-Nazi League', and seem to be totally accepted on our streets and yet it is a known fact that more people died under Stalins regime than under the Nazis.

Incidently wasn't Nazi the German abbreviation of The Socialist German Workers Party? rather strange they now call the Right-Wing NAZIS. or is thist just another label to scare people?

And now for my disclaimer before all the Lefties come down on me. I do not belong to any Far-Right political parties, although I admit to once voting for the Consevative Party, until they took it on-board to merge with the Left. I am just interested to know why it is ok to be Left-Wing but not to be Right-Wing?

[jno]

which leftwing communist rags have you got in mind exactly?

[aristotle]

The point is the Daily Mail only publishes "news" stories that suit its particular political view. It carefully censors out any elements of a story that might provide an alternative view. Serious newspapers print a variety of stories and viewpoints and, although the editorial takes a particular stance, the reader has enough information to make up their own mind.
Incidentally, there are no Left Wing rags in this country.

[littleoldme]

Don't confuse "Labour-supporting" with "left wing". They haven't been the same thing for years. I suppose the most traditionally socialist major newspaper is the Daily Mirror. The Guardian is only considered left-wing by the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph (well, most people are, compared to them), and The Sun only supports Labour because they're in power at the moment - they've had more flip-flops than a beachfront store.

The real extremes of left and right in politics are by no means as dissimilar as people think - the political "spectrum" would be better thought of as a crescent shape than a straight line.

[NH]

The Nazi party was never a socialist party, the name is misleading. And Stalin was never a true communist, he was a tyrant who murdered any who opposed him. Don't be fooled by appearances; both might have claimed to be left wing, but were the exact opposite.

The traditional principles of righty government are essentially to seize power and oppress if need be, demanding that the public: a) don't object as they're too stupid, immoral, ignorant etc. to rule and b) trust the government. Essentially, right-wing politics doesn't even make some kind of pretence about "listening to the people", so in this day and age, it ain't gonna be popular.

[LazyGun]

ALL papers have their own editorial agenda, be it Left or Right, and all papers will spin stories to suit that particular agenda.
Ones response to a particular paper is entirely dependent upon your own political leanings.

Some papers are worse that others in that regard, however, with the tabloids being the worst offenders. Most of the broadsheets at least make some attempt at impartial reporting, leaving the majority of the spin to the editorial or opinion pages.

IMO the paper that offers the most impartial view of the world would be The Independent, but they of course have their own agenda... mostly concerns over climate change.

[jno]

actually, there is one indisputably leftwing paper, the Morning Star (currently bashing Straw for talking about veils):

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index2.php/ ex/examples

It sells about 23 copies.

[anotheoldgit]

The Guardian is Britain's leading Left-Wing newspaper.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is _14_57/ai_n15631102

[aristotle]

Then your definition of left-wing must be very different from mine. The link doesn't explain what it means by left-wing.

[littleoldme]

...and of course that article from the notoriously right-wing National Review can be relied upon to be thoroughly impartial and fair-minded. LMAO.

[pageylady]

...and of course every word on 'findarticles.com' is reliable.

Im not sure that you understand the word 'left-wing'. It is a fluid term that encompasses many different types of political belief. You also do not seem to understand the term 'Nazi', or for that fact 'communist'.

'littleoldme' is correct in saying that the political spectrum is more circular than linear. Facism and communism are ideologically polar, but have some beliefs in common-(for example Stalin and Hitler both had a dislike of an established church, created youth groups, wanted to increase birth rates etc).

I find it odd that you bring up Stalin when discussing 'left-wing rags'-as you call it. It is quite a leap to go from a Labour supporting paper to, left-wing, and then to communist. (And of course Stalin himself was not tru;lu a communist-very little of his actions followed the communist manifesto, Lenin would have hated him).

I also find it ridiculous that you enter into an argument over whether Stalin or Hitler's regimes killed more people. How funny! I think that tiny matter of the Holocaust might not have helped Hitler's case. But that is a useless point anyway as the more 'right-wing' broadsheets you will see in your local newie are by no means fascist. The world is not divided into left and right, it is not as black and white as this, our politics reside mainly in the grey.