Hide right and wrong about left wing social media

In his latest column Rodney Hide writes about an ailing left that lacks puff and policy, and also blasts the political left on social media.

He is right that the left can be appalling in social media, but he is wrong that it is only the left.

Herald: Left lacks puff and policy

The left now suffer from closed minds and moral smugness. They are moribund and backward-looking.

They run from ideas. Opposing philosophies distress them.

They pillory dissenters as stupid or immoral and often both. There’s no debating or explaining, just abuse for those who step outside received wisdom.

The left have taken to social media with gusto. It only takes 140 characters to abuse and attack.

They fill Twitter and blogs with their righteousness and smugness, puffed up by their own perceived moral and intellectual superiority.

There’s no allowance that a person with a differing view might offer an opportunity to learn and to strengthen your ideas and perhaps, just perhaps, to change them.

That’s never allowed as a possibility.

Their minds are closed and they gasp and take offence at any idea or opinion different to their own.

Indeed, ganging up against dissenters on social media is what binds them. Their attacks on others proves to them their correctness and superiority.

The left are puzzled about why they’re politically marginalised but never trouble themselves to listen to those who have turned away from them. They look down on them and despise them.

The left view their political failure as the fault of voters who must be hoodwinked, stupid, selfish, or suffering some other ethical or intellectual shortcoming. Why else would they not be supporting the left when they are so good and true?

The problem is never with the left or their doctrine.

They are a self-reinforcing sect who in their wretchedness and anger are becoming ever smaller. Their narrow and insular outlook prevents them reaching out. Little wonder it’s not attractive to new recruits.

Labour is the narrow party that has shut itself off from the great bulk of New Zealanders.

I’ve seen a lot of all of this on Twitter, Facebook and on left wing blogs. And also on right wing blogs.

But I think that Hide is right, this is a real problem for Labour in particular.

Even Andrew Little has turned bitterly on ex Labour supporters, dissing them calling them right wing for having the gall to criticise Labour or stand against an anointed Labour candidate.

And there is no sign that this burning off of potential support is going to be dampened.

If the left want to attract more support they need to look more attractive.

UPDATE: I have also quoted what Rodney has said at The Standard and they are already  proving his point. That’s both funny and quite sad.

UPDATE 2: Greg Presland has had a crack back in a post – Dear Herald you can do better than Rodney Hide

Greg questions some of Hide’s claims, like the left is moribun and backward looking – only some of the left fits that description, and so does some of the right – and “National is now the vibrant party looking to the future and open to diverse views” is certainly questionable.

But Greg ignores the toxic nature of left wing social media, which is often on show at The Standard.

Leave a comment

44 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  25th September 2016

    Hide is on the money, especially regarding the pack mentality of the Left. But that pack mentality gives Righties the advantage..they can function as individual units. Righties don’t need a cheering gallery. That said, when it comes to abuse, are the Right that much different? Sure, the language is politer, and nastiness not so prevalent. But the end result is the same.

    Reply
  2. higherstandard

     /  25th September 2016

    The response to your post at The standard is comedy gold….that’s some class A grade trolling Pete.

    Reply
  3. Nick Ellis

     /  25th September 2016

    Thing is though, if you change the word left to right what Rodney has written is still true.

    Reply
    • That’s why I said that Rodney was wrong to say it was a left wing thing. I’ve seen and experienced the abuse and intolerance on all of the major blogs – Whale Oil, Kiwiblog, The Standard, The Daily Blog, Dim-Post, Public Address.

      But the mob mentality seems worse on the left. That may be more due to how those left wing blogs are run rather than a left wing thing.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  25th September 2016

        No doubt about it, Pete. You love putting a truth bomb under those Lefties. They don’t like the cold shrapnel.

        Reply
      • Nick Ellis

         /  25th September 2016

        “But the mob mentality seems worse on the left. That may be more due to how those left wing blogs are run rather than a left wing thing.”

        I think that may be down to how you are treated on those left wing blogs, rather than any real difference between them. The main difference I see is on twitter, mainly due to the ‘wellington twitterati’, but wether they are left or right is not as pertinent as that they are social justice warriors.

        Rodney say’s “They pillory dissenters as stupid or immoral and often both. There’s no debating or explaining, just abuse for those who step outside received wisdom.” At yournz this would be truest of your most right wing commenters – (one in particular).

        Reply
        • Fair comment but it’s generally not mob mentality here, it’s individual. I’ve also seen you attacking the messenger rather than debating the issue too.

          Reply
          • Nick Ellis

             /  25th September 2016

            The messenger and the message are rarely two seperate things. For example, someone say’s “I think……”, someone replies “that’s mental”, what is mental? The ‘I’ or the ‘think’?
            I’ve seen you interpret ‘think’ as ‘i’ to deflect criticism as attacking the messenger .

            Reply
            • A very confused and vague response.

              You’ve criticised me based on an apparent assumption of how I interpret things. I haven’t engaged in any mental telepathy.

              I sense some deja vu here though.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              Or as the good doctor might say “an idiot and his idiocy are not easily separated”

              “You’ve criticised me based on an apparent assumption of how I interpret things” As did you. In my defence there are commentators here where the message is the messenger and to argue against one is to attack the other.

            • Corky

               /  25th September 2016

              Glad you cut through the intended confusion and felt the deja vu.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              If there’s no mob mentality here, then why is this turning into a pile-on?

            • How many makes a mob? You had a dig and then cry foul when there’s a response.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              3 is enough.
              I’m not crying foul, just noting that your readers are in the process of disproving your claim.

            • Disproving which claim?

              Don’t worry about that question, another is more important – can you assure me you haven’t been here before under a different identity?

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              I’ve only been commenting here for a week to two. Why would I have another identity? I’ve seen you having trouble with some guy, but didn’t you ban him again last week?

            • That looks like a bit of a give away. It indicates a certain slant on something that goes back a lot further than a couple of weeks.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              This claim….”it’s generally not mob mentality here”

            • I think that’s generally correct.

              And I think you’re trying to create something out of nothing claiming a response to your digs is anything like it.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              You made the first dig.

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              “It indicates a certain slant on something that goes back a lot further than a couple of weeks.”
              I’ve been reading here for a long time.That guy that pops up tends to make such a stir that it’s hard to miss it.
              I thought I’d have a go at getting amongst it, not so sure I should have bothered now.

            • This all sounds and looks very familiar. Haven’t you tried this explanation before?

            • Nick Ellis

               /  25th September 2016

              I just said I haven’t been here before.

              “to an extent the tone is set by the host/s, and to an extent guided and controlled by the host/s.”

              So is the tone here one of deep suspicion and accusing visitors of lying?

            • Pete Kane

               /  25th September 2016

              Be fair, only when they are.

        • Pete Kane

           /  25th September 2016

          “….deja vu….” Yep

          Reply
      • Conspiratoor

         /  25th September 2016

        I’m not convinced it’s a left right thing pg. To me the tone is set by the host. Bloggers at the standard take their que from lprent. In the early whale days most of us enjoyed running one up any hapless lefty who was game enough to stick around. I think here of old rhinoceros hide, le sphincter

        Reply
  4. Pete Kane

     /  25th September 2016

    “Even Andrew Little has turned bitterly on ex Labour supporters, dissing them calling them right wing for having the gall to criticise Labour or stand against an anointed Labour candidate.”
    In fairness, there’s quite a bit more to that whole Leggett business. Quite a bit.

    Reply
  5. Alan Wilkinson

     /  25th September 2016

    I’ve said before, the distinction is very simple. The Right think the Left are ignorant and misguided. The Left think the Right are evil.

    Reply
  6. Objectively, Little was placed in a position where he could not be all things to all people. His party was divided into 3 groups at the MP level, he was not in an electoral seat, so could not claim legitimacy as an elected representative. So he needed to be a tough disciplinarian within his caucus and insist on all of the MPs to get in behind. He has been unable to do this, and he has had more than enough time to get the MPs into order. His other problem is he reads the MSM adulation as if it were the truth and actually believes what they feed him with. Not a great formula for a prospective leader of the country in my opinion.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s