Are Social Democrat parties just an establishment decoy?

[SilverSpurs]

Leading the poor and underprivelidged down blind alleys with "causes" that offer no tangible benefits to the poor. In particular policies of:
1- Pandering to trade unions; the poor are unlikely to have decent jobs so benchmarking and other payoffs to the trade unions are of little benefit. Inflexible and inefficent union work practices badly affect public services too.
2- Social liberalism; spending so much effort on stuff like getting the divorce ban removed which has done sod all for the poor. Similarly getting religion out of public life doesn't pay for the electricity or groceries. Campaigns against the death penalty only benefit the tiny minority of the poor who are 1st degree murderers. etc.
3- Environmentalism; a noble and worthy cause but useless to the poor.
4- Immigration; the greatest disservice to the poor of all as it dilutes available public services which are already stretched.
5- Universal Healthcare; Prevents competition leading to a poor service but enriches trade unions.
6- Welfare state; keeps the poor poor by getting them dependent on handouts.
7- Drug policy; keeps the poor poor by ensuring its easy to get stoned/high.
8- Fear; Especially in two party states the social democrat party stokes up fear of the christian democrat party and offers themselves as the only remedy.
9- Public transport policy; discourages the poor from driving and thus expanding their work opportunities, linked to 3.
10- Borrowing policy; New Labour bankrupted Britain (see 1 & 5 in particular) and now the poor have feel the pain.

In short SD parties offer little if anything to poor people other than soundbites and moonshine which diverts them from parties of radical change. So are they just an establishment decoy???

[ReligiouslyLeft]

Crap of the highest order

[Rory Carr]

"Public transport policy; discourages the poor from driving and thus expanding their work opportunities..."

Right. Run that by me again, Zeke.

1. Would that be a public transport policy that is efficient, reliable and cheap or one that is inefficient, unreliable and costly?

2. Would it be a totally nationalised service, a part nationalised/part privatised service or a totally privatised service?

3. Would subsidies be available to the poor for the purchase, maintenance and running costs of reliable motor vehicles to supplant their reliability on public transport?

4. Just how big a d*ckhead are you and how much of a fool do you take the rest of us for?

[borntorum]

Do I understand this properly?

1. OP doesn't agree with social democratic policies.

2. Therefore, social democracy is an 'establishment decoy'.

Hmmm, I can't say I'm wholly convinced by that argument

[ReligiouslyLeft]

8 as much as you have ?
7 is a joke I'm a social democrat and im committed to the rule of law and order
6 is a Radical Right let them die instead Tea Party Fanatics Cheer 'Let Him Die' - YouTube
3 they may as well have a world to live in that would be of some use to them

[Frank Galton]

Let's say the OP is right.

It doesn't even work any more. Where in Europe are SD parties still in power?

[ReligiouslyLeft]

Let's say the OP is right.

It doesn't even work any more. Where in Europe are SD parties still in power?

Here
Norway
Denmark
im not bother to look any further

[bormotello]

Norway

Norway has plenty of oil and gas to pay for left wing populism
BTW, Labour Party looks to slash Oslo immigrant dominance - The Local

[pragmaticapproach]

Leading the poor and underprivelidged down blind alleys with "causes" that offer no tangible benefits to the poor. In particular policies of:
1- Pandering to trade unions; the poor are unlikely to have decent jobs so benchmarking and other payoffs to the trade unions are of little benefit. Inflexible and inefficent union work practices badly affect public services too.
2- Social liberalism; spending so much effort on stuff like getting the divorce ban removed which has done sod all for the poor. Similarly getting religion out of public life doesn't pay for the electricity or groceries. Campaigns against the death penalty only benefit the tiny minority of the poor who are 1st degree murderers. etc.
3- Environmentalism; a noble and worthy cause but useless to the poor.
4- Immigration; the greatest disservice to the poor of all as it dilutes available public services which are already stretched.
5- Universal Healthcare; Prevents competition leading to a poor service but enriches trade unions.
6- Welfare state; keeps the poor poor by getting them dependent on handouts.
7- Drug policy; keeps the poor poor by ensuring its easy to get stoned/high.
8- Fear; Especially in two party states the social democrat party stokes up fear of the christian democrat party and offers themselves as the only remedy.
9- Public transport policy; discourages the poor from driving and thus expanding their work opportunities, linked to 3.
10- Borrowing policy; New Labour bankrupted Britain (see 1 & 5 in particular) and now the poor have feel the pain.

In short SD parties offer little if anything to poor people other than soundbites and moonshine which diverts them from parties of radical change. So are they just an establishment decoy???

Agree with many points, but you fail to acknowledge the socially liberal fiscally conservative position as an alternative to both interventiionist social democrats and conservatives.

" Drug policy; keeps the poor poor by ensuring its easy to get stoned/high"

Are you really that thick??? drug prohibition forces the price of these substances up on the black market fueling criminality and the prices people pay for them since they are artificially inflated. cop on to yourself!!!