The most overused word of the decade - hate
One of the things which concerns me about the state of political debate not just in Britain but throughout the world is the extent of excessive anger against those who merely have different opinions.
I am not talking about those who are angry with the specific individuals who have actually done something which caused harm to themselves, their families, or their country, but those who are angry with anyone who holds a different political opinion.
For example, even thirty-five years after the so-called "Winter of Discontent" I still feel a certain amount of anger against those who created the situation where my father was rung up on the morning he was due to go into hospital for a heart operation which doctors thought was an emergency, and told that shop stewards representing porters and cleaners had vetoed that operation as not being enough of an emergency. Any suggestion that these NUPE and COHSE show stewards really thought they knew better than doctors what an emergency was clearly didn't concern the union leader who stated at the time about this kind of strike in the Health service "If someone dies, so be it."
The anger that I felt that this sort of outrage could happen in our country was a major part of my motivation in becoming involved in politics - and in particular it is the reason I have always known in the core of my being that Labour party claims to have a monopoly of concern for patients of the NHS are just plain wrong - but I have always tried to avoid allowing that anger, and my anger with other things that subsequent Labour administrations have got wrong, to spill over into hatred of every member or supporter of the Labour party.
The thing that frightens me about the comments pages of all the national newspapers and a good many blogs is how unconstrained the bile and anger expressed by people right accross the political spectrum is.
Earlier today I was reading a "Comment is Free" thread on the Guardian site in response to a rather silly proposal by a rather silly UKIP spokesman. About a third of the posts had been removed by moderators. What was downright scary was to look at many of the posts which were left and think - if these have been left up, what were the ones which have been removed by moderators like?
Another UKIP thread in the Guardian here included these two comments about characterising opinions with which one disagrees as "hate" which I thought was far more valuable than anything else in either article or either comment thread:
Giggidy
"Hate-filled? That's a bit much I think. Barmy perhaps, and unrealistic - their manifesto for 2010 discussed recently was an absolute joke of a document - but hardly hate filled."
Westmorlandia
"I think I agree. They don't want to abolish statutory maternity pay out of hatred, but because they believe Britain peaked in 1900, and that women should be fine staying at home bringing up the kids while the husbands cycles to work in the village post office and so on.
I would happily describe them as dangerously misguided, but they (or most of them, I think/hope) aren't full of hate for anything or anyone.
I think it does matter how we debate UKIP. I worry that we will end up like the US, where Democrats shout that Republicans "hate" women and Republicans shout that Democrats "hate" America - the end result of that is that everyone really does start hating each other."
I think they have a point, we already have started down that road - and it's time we got off it.
I am not talking about those who are angry with the specific individuals who have actually done something which caused harm to themselves, their families, or their country, but those who are angry with anyone who holds a different political opinion.
For example, even thirty-five years after the so-called "Winter of Discontent" I still feel a certain amount of anger against those who created the situation where my father was rung up on the morning he was due to go into hospital for a heart operation which doctors thought was an emergency, and told that shop stewards representing porters and cleaners had vetoed that operation as not being enough of an emergency. Any suggestion that these NUPE and COHSE show stewards really thought they knew better than doctors what an emergency was clearly didn't concern the union leader who stated at the time about this kind of strike in the Health service "If someone dies, so be it."
The anger that I felt that this sort of outrage could happen in our country was a major part of my motivation in becoming involved in politics - and in particular it is the reason I have always known in the core of my being that Labour party claims to have a monopoly of concern for patients of the NHS are just plain wrong - but I have always tried to avoid allowing that anger, and my anger with other things that subsequent Labour administrations have got wrong, to spill over into hatred of every member or supporter of the Labour party.
The thing that frightens me about the comments pages of all the national newspapers and a good many blogs is how unconstrained the bile and anger expressed by people right accross the political spectrum is.
Earlier today I was reading a "Comment is Free" thread on the Guardian site in response to a rather silly proposal by a rather silly UKIP spokesman. About a third of the posts had been removed by moderators. What was downright scary was to look at many of the posts which were left and think - if these have been left up, what were the ones which have been removed by moderators like?
Another UKIP thread in the Guardian here included these two comments about characterising opinions with which one disagrees as "hate" which I thought was far more valuable than anything else in either article or either comment thread:
Giggidy
"Hate-filled? That's a bit much I think. Barmy perhaps, and unrealistic - their manifesto for 2010 discussed recently was an absolute joke of a document - but hardly hate filled."
Westmorlandia
"I think I agree. They don't want to abolish statutory maternity pay out of hatred, but because they believe Britain peaked in 1900, and that women should be fine staying at home bringing up the kids while the husbands cycles to work in the village post office and so on.
I would happily describe them as dangerously misguided, but they (or most of them, I think/hope) aren't full of hate for anything or anyone.
I think it does matter how we debate UKIP. I worry that we will end up like the US, where Democrats shout that Republicans "hate" women and Republicans shout that Democrats "hate" America - the end result of that is that everyone really does start hating each other."
I think they have a point, we already have started down that road - and it's time we got off it.
Comments