Dear Tory voter: I can call you a cunt if I want

Ruby Lott-Lavigna
Ruby Lott-Lavigna  /  180 Comments

Just before the election, a friend of mine posted a status on Facebook (the audacity!) about why you shouldn’t vote Conservative. It was angry, and conflated the desire to vote Tory with being neglectful. It was, as most of these statuses are, unremarkable in the fact that it declared a person’s opinion, along with a few facts about the consequences of the last five years.


These people are patently cunts

Cue the Tory tidal wave of righteous indignation. “I think it’s a bit out of line.” “We’re all entitled to our opinions.” How dare you point to how my political opinion might have personal and ethical implication! Leave me and my black lab in peace.

You might think that if you’re voting Tory, you’re voting for something objective and unemotional like economic policy (which, of course, can never combine with social policy). It’s just as simple as that. You probably just believe your vote has nothing to do with pointless emotional engagement, because at the end of the day you just need to do what’s best for the country in order to create a stable Britain. Those left-wingers calling you immoral, pathetic scum on social media are making unnecessary ad hominem attacks on you and your opinions, which are just as valid as theirs.


These people have free reign to wreak havoc on our most vulnerable

Except, here’s the problem. When you see an expression of dislike towards you as a person because you voted for the Conservative Party, that is not a tantrum because you disagree with a lefty. It’s because the things you are voting for – the policies – economic and social, make you directly complicit in something that, like an act such as kicking a puppy in the face because you can, is wrong. It is an emotional response, because when you look at the choice you made at this general election, you need to observe the effects that choice will have on individual people, and empathise.

This is not a weakness because it is not the fucking Victorian era and you are not in a boarding school with Jane Eyre. It is not clouding your vision to make decisions because as adults, we make decisions every day that involve our emotions, without fainting. In fact, if anyone’s blind, it’s probably a load of white, cis, middle class guys telling the world it’s actually going to be all right, and that the Tories aren’t neglecting those at the bottom. When have they ever seen what it’s like at the bottom?

Fuck off. Just fuck off

Fuck off. Just fuck off

When I call you immoral, or a cunt, it’s not because I’m angry you take a differing opinion to me. Nor is it just because I think the policies you agree in are bad just because they’re Tory.  Or because we’ve lost - if the Libdems had taken a majority (lol) I’d be annoyed, but I’d probably not call them immoral. It’s because you believe that some abstract notion that “a strong economy” without any promise of an eventual redistribution is better than helping those who have nowhere to live, or learn, or to get help. It is immoral to kick disabled people out of their houses because they have one extra bedroom, to cut housing benefits to the under 21s, to cut legal aid and the CAB so people actively can’t seek legal advice, to have 96% of your party vote so LGBT couples can’t adopt. Even though austerity doesn’t work, the Tories historically haven’t been too keen on changing their welfare policy at the best of times - see: strong economic periods in Tory rule, such as Thatcher era, when huge cuts were made to education, housing and the arts. It’s selfish, and it pisses me off.

Have your opinion, but preferably don’t have one that contributes to a poverty and inequality. So let’s make this clear once and for all: I’m calling you a cunt, not because of some abstract tribalist anger at a your Tory vote, but because the policies you vote for make you a cunt.

  • can i

    also call you a cunt then? because I think you’re a cunt.

    • Jack May


  • ghfh

    this is just pathetic. you lost and get over yourself.

  • Sophie Yates

    Nailed it.

  • GH
    • David Paxton

      Exactly that.

  • RN

    This is one of the silliest articles ive ever read. you can phrase it as nicely as you want but this is as much an ad hominem attack as the ones you condemn in the article. you should be ashamed of yourself for characterizing the tory voter as not care. we vote tory bc we are currently the strongest economy in europe (imf says this and so does almost every other INDEPENDENT body). labour brought us years of deficit building and chaos but you conveniently dont mention that. this article is so pathetic

    • person

      Pretty sure the person also never mentioned a love for Labour. You do know that the two-party-system isn’t really a thing any more, don’t you? There are other options.

    • Lolwut?

      The strongest economy in europe is Germany and has been for the past few years (IMF figures from 2013/2014 confirm this).

  • Roxy

    Firstly, the posh stereotype of Tory voters with the reference to the black lab, as well as the constant swearing instantly devalues this article. Secondly, you are very welcome to judge some Tory policies - we judge some of Labour’s too. Despite this, judging a person for their voting choices is unnecessary, it’s a personal choice and one that relates to each person as an individual. As a Tory voter I do not think that the poor/disabled/LGBT community should have to suffer, but there are other things I think to be important as well. The childish undertones of this article completely ruin it and had it been done with some respect, you may have had a point.

    • Jonathan

      You do realise that if your voting choice relates to a person as an individual, that means their personality is visible in their voting choice and therefore no, judging people on their choices is completely necessary as it tells you about them as a person.

    • mike hamblett

      It was written in anger and has raised a fantastic no of comments; well done Ruby.

  • cis white etonian

    calling tories cunts surely does something to devalue the good work of feminism in reclaiming that word as no more than a synonym for vagina.

    • X

      The word cunt has long since shed its traditional connotations. Feminism isn’t applicable to every circumstance, no matter how hard you might try to make it

      • er

        please explain what these traditional connotations are?

        • X

          “nothing more than a synonym for a vagina”, as said by original poster

  • David Paxton

    Of course voting for bankruptcy and unemployment is totally moral.

    • Tim Squirrell

      Austerity is a policy-set which aims to cut public spending, dampening demand and causing lay-offs in the public (and indirectly private) sector. Does a vote for deep austerity not equate to a vote for unemployment?

      • David Paxton

        Well this was more a general discussion on Tories and being cunts. If you want to reduce it to this ok.

        Now all the national parties stood on platform of cuts. Labour have gone into the last 2 elections with austerity as their policy. You can add the word ‘deep’ to try and draw a clear distinction but it doesn’t really work. The Coalition, by the way, ended up following Darling’s levels of cuts. Yet only the Tories are ‘cunts’.

        “Does a vote for deep austerity not equate to a vote for unemployment?”

        Well isn’t this just the point. EVERY Labour administration has left office with more unemployed. If this is therefore your measure of morality then history tells us anyone voting for Labour are ‘cunts’. This is what I have written about below with the danger of this moralising twaddle. Even when one puts people out of work one still thinks themselves a hero etc.
        As it happens the Tories have massively decreased unemployment.

        I think it befits serious discussion to not lay down the economic analysis you prefer as a fact by the way.

        • starvingbutstillworking

          Of course voting for a party that just hired someone who is against same sex marriage as equalities minister is the most moral thing anyone can do!

          • David Paxton

            How is it immoral?

    • Bananatwix

      Good old Tory bullshit.

  • Charlie

    So 37% of the population own black labs and are cunts? Right…

  • David Paxton

    The problem with this viewpoint (a very common one) is that it blinds people to their own deficiencies. If those you disagree with are evil you always end up being good. So even when you propose a policy and it fucks up and causes hardship by accident, you will still think you are morally right. If the opponents do the opposite, you will still think them wrong.
    It is a tautology of self-love and ego. It pretends to be selfless but is actually all about the love of self.
    And it’s not just fucking childish, it is a route to flabby thinking and harmful policies. That’s before we get on to the utter cuntishness of dehumansing people that disagree with you or the total lack of experience of people and life outside of the author’s circles.

    In short this article is deeply silly. No doubt the author has a big future on the Left. 😉

    • starvingbutstillworking

      The only Morally wrong and inept party are the one that just hired someone who voted against same sex marriage as equality minister. there is no way getting round that that IS morally reprehensible.

  • UriahOlathaire

    The author demonstrating that the millennials still haven’t realised that slactivism and social media outrage don’t actually do anything. What were those polls saying again?

    • Josh E.

      Those polls said that over 63% of voters did not vote for a Conservative government.

      • AF

        And nearly 70% didn’t want a Labour government, 87% didn’t want the Nazi party, sorry, UKIP, 92% didn’t want the Lib Dems and 96% didn’t want the Greens…

        • Josh E.

          Exactly! This is why we need a new system: so that the party in power can be the party that most people were most in favour of!

          • AF

            You really didn’t understand my point did you? And did you actually read what you wrote? Because funilly enough the party IN power, is THE party that MOST people were MOST in favour of. I presume you meant something else…………

          • Josh E.

            There’s no need to patronise me.
            Unfortunately, the Conservatives are not necessarily the most favoured party. All we could say is that they are probably the least disliked party.
            Our election system is perfect for gerrymandering, tactical voting and takes no account of an individual’s order of preference. With a proportionally representative electoral system, more votes would actually make a difference to the outcome of an election and there would be little need to vote against, rather than for, any party.
            TLDR: Our voting system is broken and, until it is fixed, no government we elect can truly represent this country.

  • ohdear

    This is drivel. What a thoughtless, blanketing, misguided peurile piece of writing this is. Reads like the immature ramblings of a failed New Statesman intern.

  • AnotherAngryLiberal

    You have pretty much voiced everything that I have wanted to say for the last couple of days!
    Only issue I have is with the use of the word cunt as a negative (cunts are great!) but otherwise thank you and ignore the moany buggers on the comments.

  • ur a joke

    Trying hard to come across as embarrassingly petulant, immature and narrow minded?

  • Jubjub

    Equally I would be justified in calling you a cunt for giving student journalism a bad name, since that actually has some credibility to it.

  • The main issue

    is that right-wingers and left-wingers personally judge each other in different ways.

    When a conservative disagrees with a liberal on political issues, the conservative sees them as naive and childishly idealistic.

    When a liberal disagrees with a conservative, the liberal sees them as selfish and callous.

    It is far easier to forgive ignorance than malice. If you see your opponent as actively immoral, you judge them far more harshly than somebody who you see as merely foolish.

  • Om

    If you swore less people might take your point of view more seriously.

  • Observations

    It’s interesting that those criticising this article haven’t managed to defend the Tory policies attacked within it, but rather have resorted either to personal attacks or pointing out that the majority of Conservative voters don’t live up to the stereotype.

    Both of these may be true, but this doesn’t change the fact that many Tory policies and Tory politicians are actively making decisions that will make life harder for society’s most vulnerable, and as a voter giving them a mandate you become complicity in the consequences.

    • Douglas

      The vulnerable won’t just be hurt. There have already been deaths and suicides by ill and mentally unwell people due to Tory cuts.

      Everyone who voted Tory is complicit in these deaths.


      • gary

        So by that logic everyone who voted labour is responsible all the civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. Douglas I hate to say it but you’re a stupid cunt.

        • Me

          The people who voted Tory voted for policies which lead to the aforementioned deaths. The people who voted Labour previously didn’t know there was a war coming and therefore didn’t vote to kill people killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. You cunt.

          • MDoran

            Miliband was in government when the aforementioned wars were undertaken. If you voted Labour subsequently you are condoning the resultant civilian deaths. Of course, I don’t actually believe that - but it was fun to imagine the world through your bigoted, illogical, hate-filled eyes.

  • Great idea

    Yup, this is what will win you the next election.

  • AF

    Let me guess, you are a student of the arts?

  • An Other

    Here’s something for you: So you think a strong economy is wrong? So you think having a job is wrong? So you think being unemployed is better? Here’s some news for you, because you are obviously too stupid to realise this. A strong economy means having a job. Yes it does. It REALLY does. It also means you can have a roof over your head, buy food, and pay taxes to pay the public sector. In fact guess what? The more people who have more jobs pay more tax and that tax can go into the country! Who’da thought that? Obviously not you of course. Guess what happens when the economy isn’t strong? People lose their jobs because there isn’t a need for them any more. Oh dear…. that means less tax….less tax means less money to go around… and less benefits for those who don’t have a job. But being young, naive and stupid, you don’t realise this. You haven’t been in a situation where you understand that the state of the economy determines whether or not you will be able to pay your mortgage have you, because you don’t know if you will have a job? No. You haven’t. I have. I might be a cunt, but you are a thick cunt

    • Bananatwix

      Well that’s if you believe they’re really fixing the economy and not just strangling growth. But we’ll see.

    • http://www.ben-xo.com/ benxo

      You’ve just argued with nobody - because nobody in this article said that having a strong economy was wrong. Voting Labour (or Lib Dem) would also have been a vote for a stronger economy because all three of those parties have policies which put having a strong economy - and stronger employment - first. Regardless of whether you think they can deliver it: it’s what all three of them want.

      But the difference is the Con policies do that at the expense of the poorest, the weak and the vulnerable, by cutting the safety net. Now I understand that efficiency is important; but when the ‘strong economy’ benefits are disproportionately going to the richest, why is it wrong to get them to pay their fair share? That’s the price of admission to a civilised country: you pay your fair share.

      But instead, the Con’s are boosting the economy at the expense of people like you, when you didn’t have job security. You’ve been in that position and yet you voted against people like yourself. You’ve voted against your own safety net. I think that’s weird.

      • An Other

        Would you mind telling me which safety net I voted against? Because the same net is there, irrespective of what party is in power.

        And funnily enough, it wasn’t the Conservatives who were in power when I faced redundancy.

        On to the key point: At this point in time the economy is weak but recovering. The deficit is still with us, but shrinking. The debt is increasing, but at a slower rate. At some point the deficit will become a surplus, and then we can elimate the debt and spend more money on social issues. To vote for any other party, particularly UKIP (by removing us from the EU) or the Greens (ridiculous plans that would need a lot of funding) at this point in time would likely lead to economic ruin. They could have BANKRUPTED US. You think we have troubles now? You think the poor are suffering now? Pah!

        So that’s the Greens and the Nazi party out of the equation. That leaves Labour. Labour messed up massively. I can’t trust a government to mess up what has been done so far..

        And that is the whole point of my comment. Voting for anyone else would lead to a weak ecomony, by default.

        Oh and finally: I can’t vote for a leader who is weaker and more irritating than Cameron. I didn’t think there could be…but there is.

        So I had a choice. Vote Tory, or vote for no-one. And no-one was not an option.

        • Hairy one

          It wasn’t the “nasty” tories who decided to implement “housing market renewal” in 2004 where by John Prescott’s policy forcibly Compulsory Purchased thousands of affordable homes from their owners across the north and Midlands from Liverpool, Manchester, Hull, Burnley Stoke etc. where by they demolished the houses or ran the areas down (like the welsh streets in Liverpool) to sell the land cheap to their party doaners to build housing association flats or (or flout their own policy that the land was for houses and sell the land off to a private individual to build an academy as in the Red Triangle in Darwen.) Can you imagine how the 90 year old lady 2 doors away from me felt when she received the letter from the council that said her home, the one she’d lived in since she got married after the war, was going to be demolished and she would be compelled to sell up.

          Fuck the labour party.

          It wasnt the torys that demanded tuition fees upfront prior to the start of the year. While the current fees are nominally higher - unless you get a job paying around £40k a year, a student graduating under the current student loan scheme will pay less of their loan back than those that went to university between 1998 and 2011 as anyone on less than £38k when the loan repayments start one pay the money off before the loan is written off after 30 years.

        • starvingbutstillworking

          The irony of all of this is with the cons hiring an equality minister that opposed gay rights, and two advocates of hanging, one being the minister of the DWP and the other the minister of JUSTICE kinda shows that YOU are the one voting for the Nazi party.

  • TheSensibleStudent

    I appreciate this is a long comment but I would appreciate a full read.

    You talk about how “immoral” the Tory policies are, cutting welfare to those most in need etc etc. I don’t tend to resort to personal insults when debating politics, however, since you called me a cunt, I think I am perfectly entitled to call you a short-sighted, naive idiot. And I shall explain why.

    The real IMMORALITY may not be obvious now, but if your wonderful Labour party had come into power on Friday morning, it would be us, the younger generations, who would spend a lifetime paying off the extraordinary amount of debt that would be used in public spending on benefits, pensions etc.

    In 2010, Labour ran a deficit of over £150 billion. That was roughly 11% of GDP, similar to the spending levels of Greece at that time (and look where they are now). A the rate things were going, a never ending increase in spending was inevitable and the UK would rack up more and more debt to a level that would be unsustainable in both the long and the short term!

    I agree, economic policy does not have the same appealing and emotive nature as your wonderful, idealistic social views. However, unfortunately for us, the IMF takes a more cold, hard view based on economic grounding that any other logical business would take. And for this reason, if the UK were to borrow its way forward, eventually the “good times” would end and the result would be economic chaos of a far greater magnitude to that seen in 2008/9. The country would be bankrupt.

    Now you tell me what is IMMORAL - Anybody with any money to their name would be looking how to get it out of the country, while those who could not afford such a privilege would be left to pay off an incomprehensible amount of debt over their lifetime, to a government that would almost definitely not be able to help those worse off in society via social welfare.

    Five years ago, the conservatives identified this issue, and have been reducing the deficit every year. Until we return to a position of economic stability we cannot begin to tackle our debt or provide increases to welfare which I agree, are well needed in certain areas.

    The problem with the electorate today, as highlighted so obviously by the author (among other traits I’m sure her mother wouldn’t be proud of), is the sheer short-sighted selfishness of the country’s future. Politicians, particularly the Labour Party, have continually looked to keep the electorate happy with promises to increase the well being of those in the less well-off areas of society via welfare handouts. As highlighted above, an increase in public spending will only increase the deficit, eradicating any hope to ever paying off the country’s debt which will eventually only lead to failure.

    Politics can be “immoral” on many levels, but you tell me what is worse, short term suffering for a few, or a lifetime suffering for many, many more?

    Therefore, if you voted CONSERVATIVE on Thursday I congratulate you, as you have identified this issue and believe in a fair society where you don’t live beyond your means and don’t finance your lifestyle via crazy amounts of borrowing. If you voted LABOUR, I sympathise for you as the thought process behind your social idealistic views can help identify many problems in society, however, open your eyes a little wider and think about the long term impact, rather than the immediate short term effect of economic policy.

    To the Author, I think my comment may have given you more credit than due. In the future, note that calling people Cunts is one sure fire way to ensure you are not taken seriously.

    • P.O’Morain


      • TheSensibleStudent

        Shouldn’t you be busy rioting and graffiting war memorials instead of writing pointless comments like that P. O’Morain?

      • TheSensibleStudent

        Interesting take…

      • Trinatrue

        Very original P. O’Morain.

        Hear, hear! Ruby.

        • Adam

          But if any of the parties had any sense they would tax the corporations not paying any tax and everything would be funded easily. end of 😉

      • MDoran

        Good point. I shall definitely vote Labour next time.

    • Guest

      Granted that Labour did build up a deficit of £150 billion in 2010; however, you haven’t mentioned what the main cause of this is. The UK began to be hit badly by the global financial crisis of 2007-2009. The deficit built up by the Labour Government was inevitable as stock markets dropped worldwide and governments had to spend huge amounts of money to bailout banks in order to prevent economic collapse of many large financial institutions. These graphs show the massive leap of government spending and national debt that occurred between 2008-2010: http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/334/uk-economy/uk-national-debt/

      And yes, it is true that UK deficit has gone down since the Tories got into power; however, this money has been saved by cutting spending across a huge range of services and ignoring other ways of saving money. Just to use a couple of examples, in 2012, the Government cut the top rate of tax from 50p to 45p. Yet, in 2014, Benefits were capped which affected some of the UK’s poorest people (but only saved 0.05% of welfare spending). In what way is this moral? Government cuts to the most vulnerable in the country seem especially unfair when you consider that some of the richest in the country are getting away with tax avoidance which is reportedly losing the government £700m per year.(http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/private-equity-bosses-using-700m-tax-loophole-and-donating-to-the-tories-10054911.html).

      I agree (as I assume most people would) that the country’s deficit needs to be decreased, but what the Tories have already done and what they plan to already do seems only seems to be providing long term benefits for the richest people in the country.

      • TheSensibleStudent

        There is a common misconception here regarding the cost of bailing out the banks. The cost is not included in the countries debt/deficit as the government has taken on the debt/liabilities of the banks and therefore, these will be paid off over time - like a normal investment. (the government potentially stands to make a profit on these due to interest payments from the banks).

        I agree the Global Financial Crisis was a shock to the system, however the problem lies in the fact that the Labour government of the time began to build up the deficit long before the financial crisis, and when the recession hit we were not in a strong position to deal with the consequences and increased spending driven by higher unemployment and higher costs of service provision. http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/3/20/1363802502484/Deficits-by-chancellor-001.jpg

        Reducing the tax rate to 45p actually allows the government to increase its revenue from tax. There are plenty of other destinations where the tax rates for the wealthy are far more appealing. However, slightly reducing the tax rate incentivises more of the wealthy to stay in this country, having the net effect of increased tax revenues. It’s a common phrase that is thrown around, but the most wealthy few of this country actually contribute more than millions less well off people. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11233686/How-top-3000-earners-pay-more-tax-than-bottom-9-million.html

        Like it or not, the rich pay for the majority of government spending in this country. The socialist demonisation of the wealthy is again, a short-sighted and selfish thought process - this is undoubtedly stirred up by the media and can fool even the best of us.

        In no way is cutting a vulnerable persons support moral in anyway. However, my initial comment made reference to the importance of essentially “choosing the lesser of two evils” when regarding the current state and future of a country. Sacrifices have to be made by people of all walks of life - whether they are by a business owner or somebody relying on welfare payments for their living. Nobody likes doing it, but in my opinion, and that of the largest voting share of the electorate, sacrifice has to be made in order to return this country to economic stability.

        • InNeedofDefence

          You haven’t by chance written up what you have just said in your first comment and your reply to ‘guest’ in an article somewhere? As what you have written completely sums up why I voted for the Tories (I personally wouldn’t call myself a tory), and I would love to be able share it with my Labour voting friends so they can see things from my perspective as at the moment it’s all one way traffic towards why I shouldn’t have voted conservative.

          • TheSensibleStudent

            Unfortunately I am no journalist so no article exists. I just have a moderately strong opinion towards certain aspects of this country and felt a need to add some more credit to these issues than the author of this, quite frankly childish, article gave. However, perhaps I may may my debut soon! Feel free to share my views with your friends. I am sure you or I are not the only ones with this logical and sensible opinion. With more exposure of pro-conservative views, hopefully this one way traffic you talk of can become balanced with people having their own informed opinions - as opposed the believing everything the political bias of their chosen newspaper prints.

          • acidneedle

            Fuck these little fascists, @thesensiblestudent:disqus, reason and logic will prevail - just as it did on May 8 2015. And then when they try to get real jobs at daddy or mummy’s paper, we can just post a link on twitter to the racist and social abuse they’ve posted here.

          • Michael Hester

            Yeah I’m really hoping that now people will see what a real Conservative government is like, lots of people, particularly of my age (20s) will see that all this crap they’ve been told about how evil and nasty the Tories are will be proved wrong and that they will feel able to vote for them in even greater numbers in 2020 giving them an even bigger majority.

          • Segmented

            Over 100,000 disabled people have died as a direct result of Tory cuts. George Osborne failed his maths GCSE and is somehow chancellor? It boggles the mind.

          • PAUL BAKER

            you have got brain damage

          • John Boyle

            Nope. You’re just a Tory cunt. You cunt.

          • MDoran

            And you’re a nasty, hateful little bigot. Wash your mouth out.

          • Skellan

            I vote Tory or UKIP and I’m an enormously well paid and self satisfied cunt. I drive a Range Rover and shoot foxes and everything.

            I hope that annoys you.

          • Segmented

            Because you are a cunt.

          • Skellan

            Since when we won an election. Bloody marvellous.

          • Segmented

            Awful grammar.

        • Average

          You are correct that New Labour didn’t put enough away during the boom years that they oversaw (strange that a non-Tory party could oversee such growth eh?). Your graph above only shows the net borrowing in amounts, not the deficit in the current account as a percentage of GDP. Labour inherited a pretty impressive deficit from the Tories in 1997 and immediately turned it into a well-sustained surplus - again, strange that an economically illiterate left could achieve this? The Tories signed up to the same spending plan as Labour in 2007, and more to the point - when their ideologically-driven austerity was no proving not to kick start growth in the economy in 2012, (even pointed out by the IMF) they reverted back to a plan with less cuts that Labour originally suggested. The outcome - growth. By the way the great bastion of equity and expertise that you champion - the IMF have you seen their governance structure? No…? Have you heard of their Structural Adjustment Programs? No? Are you watching how they deal with the Greek debt crisis which threatens to bring down the Eurozone? Didn’t think so). By the way you cannot also seriously compare Greece to the UK. Rather absurd as our economy is much more diverse, much bigger and we are significantly more powerful on geopolitical stage. You seem to have swallowed the right wing narrative hook, line and sinker and I look forward to your journalist career as an economic correspondent. Your predictions for the next 5 years will likely be laughable in 2020.

        • Simon Glass

          The fact that the rich pay most tax is simply a sign, and result of, how hugely unequal this country is. And another way of looking at this is that the poor pay more tax as a proportion of income than any other income group. This is because of indirect taxation - things like vat, fuel and alcohol duty etc.

          • TheSensibleStudent

            You have a valid point, to a degree, there is inequality in our society. However, if we lived in a country where there were no winners or losers, where would the entrepreneurial spirit come from that helps drive our economy forward?
            The indirect taxes you mention are a point for consideration. The majority of items taxed via the methods you mention are optional, hence necessities such as food are not applicable to VAT. Once again the fundamental problem of people living beyond their means arises and is a strong cause for the poor paying more “tax” as a proportion of income.

          • Simon Glass

            Many essential purchases are subject to VAT - eg. heating, clothes, sanitary towels and tampons, kitchen equipment (cookers, washing machines) and inclusion necessities such as broadband, phones, computers, TVs, petrol or diesel etc. Buying such things would not necessitate over consumption. VAT is very regressive tax and should be replaced by higher income tax levels (for all, but the poorest). As to inequality even the IMF recognise that far from fostering entrepeneurship, it stifles growth, reduces access to education (through rising house prices) and increases the risk of financial crises. Some inequality is fine, but the in the UK at the moment is way out of hand!

          • SP

            In reply to ‘However, if we lived in a country where there were no winners or losers, where would the entrepreneurial spirit come from that helps drive our economy forward?’ - There are several problems with this. First we don’t have free-flowing social mobility. Secondly, we are arguably a construct of our biology and experiences and although we may have some other aspect of ourself that helps us form our life decisions this contributes a great deal to this. Without giving everyone a fair step in life you are predetermining the winners and losers! Where is your empathy/ humanity? Surely we want everyone (as far as we can help) to have an equal quality of life? Why should what social class we are born into and a good business mind grant great quality of life in one case and condemn others to poverty?

          • Christine Morrison Hughes

            By and large people who vote Tory are incapable of empathy because they are sociopaths. Look at how ‘The Sensible Student’ talks- its cold, rational, calculating, factual and with a complete lack of sentiment. He is a sociopath, ergo a cunt

          • Michael Hester

            Totally ridiculous! Provide evidence of that or accept you are wrong. Or can I make a blanket statement that all Labour voters are completely irrational bleeding heart liberals who let their emotions overcome their logic? Also, why is it wrong to look at things rationally and apply logic rather than emotion? Surely government should be run according to logic. You may disagree with the logic of the Right, but it’s then up to you to present an alternative logical argument. The fact that Labour can’t do this and only appeals to emotion is why they lost.

          • slepkane

            You could make that “completely irrational bleeding heart liberals” blanket statement if you provided proof. But given that for the past seventy years Tories have always borrowed more and repaid less than Labour I’m not sure where your “completely irrational” argument will come from:

            And here’s the rational logic: Economies thrive when everyone can afford stuff. Growing inequality is terrible for the economy. Are we liberal though? Yes - Why, are you illiberal? Are our hearts also bleeding? Yes again, because real people - including friends - are suffering from the unrelenting dogmatic incompetence of this government. That’s the point of the article.

          • Christine Morrison Hughes

            By and large people who vote Tory are incapable of empathy because they are sociopaths. Look at how ‘The Sensible Student’ talks- its cold, rational, calculating, factual and with a complete lack of sentiment. He is a sociopath, ergo a ‘cunt’.

          • acidneedle

            Hmm, you’re the one dismissing people with obscene abuse ands they’re the sociopaths? I guess you couldn’t get into good college, eh, Spart?

          • Christine Morrison Hughes

            What? I am a mental health nurse so there isn’t the same sort of snobbery about the type of training hospitals/ universities we train at. And for your information, just calling someone a name does not a sociopath make 😉

          • acidneedle

            Buzz off, Nurse Ratched.

          • slepkane

            Did you read it?

          • James

            Social mobility is so dire because of labour’s repeated decimation of state education.

          • Nkaplan

            “Surely we want everyone (as far as we can help) to have an equal quality of life?”

            Surely we want everyone (so far as we can) to have a good/ excellent quality of life, rather than an equal one? We could have an equal quality of life by e.g. following the policies of the Khmer Rouge, destroying both society and the economy equally for all - but I don’t see such an outcome having much, or indeed anything, to recommend it. Equality is at best irrelevant, at worst a terrifying delusion approached only through a mass of bodies, rivers of blood and state interference of totalitarian proportions.

          • Alison Piearcey

            It’s nice that you believe that necessities don’t attract VAT. I on the other hand think that gas to heat my home is a necessity; that soap isn’t optional, and that 5 days in 28, being female has no opt-out clause. Sorry to have to bounce your reality check.

          • slepkane

            Having “losers” does nothing to help the entrepreneurial spirit because the losers are never the entrepreneur. What happened to the bankers who “lost”? They got another go, at our expense. Our economy and our culture and our quality of life have always been strongest when working people have spending money, not when the rich get richer off the back of an inflating wage-slave class.

          • Emma Wetherell

            The rich pay less tax than they poor. They may pay a higher % of income tax, but if you add all the tax types together (VAT etc) the poor pay a higher % than the rich, and they can afford it a lot less. If I recall correctly, the numbers are something like 38% overall tax on the rich and 45% overall tax on the poor. It’s probably because the poor spend a higher % of their earnings, and don’t have much (if any) left over.

          • MDoran

            I agree that more of the burden should fall on the rich, so maybe the top rate of income tax should rise. Indirect taxation such as VAT is a vital tool for discouraging anti-social and damaging consumption behaviours such as smoking (burden on the NHS) and vehicles with high emissions. If we scrapped it, or even lowered the percentage, we would not only reduce the government’s tax revenue but we would also lose a really policy instrument.

          • Trying to inform and inspire

            Well that simply isn’t true. By definition, wealthy people have more money, so they spend more money, and so they pay more VAT than less wealthy people. In this way VAT is by far the fairest form of tax as it means wealthy people naturally pay more without being forced to give up half their income to the government. This also means wealthy people are less likely to move abroad due to aggressively high income taxes (assuming VAT is used to reduced rate of income tax). I’d also point out that wealthy people will buy more luxury items which have VAT whereas poorer people may not and so won’t actually pay as much VAT as they buy mostly essential items like clothing. With regards to fuel tax and alcohol tax, fuel duty should be lower -it stifles our economy, and alcohol tax should be higher -excessive alcohol consumption is unhealthy and leads to a lower standard of living (the most important thing) and of course puts unescessary strain in the NHS.

            And for those arguing for high income tax, I’m against both on principal and because it makes no economic sense. It makes no economic sense because higher taxes just mean wealthy leave the country taking their money (and maybe any jobs they support) with them. That means NO money collected by the her majesty’s revenue and customs , but collected by the U.S. Tax authority, or the Hong kong, Singapore, Swiss, etc tax authority instead.

            Now on principle higher taxes are wrong as well. It is essential state sponsors theft and discrimination. Those who argue the rich should contribute more, well for a start, they already do, in fact even if they pay 0% tax they would contribute massively to the economy just in what they spend not even taking into account if they employ anyone. Also, what right do you have to demand that an individual give away large sums of their own, usually legitamitely hard earned money away? These people work very hard for what they have. They suffered through education and further education in poverty, or they suffered through the early stages of business, in poverty, and now they have finally achieved a good standard of living you want to take it from them and give it to the people who didn’t put in that effort or suffer through long days for little money at the start!

            Left wing people are constantly arguing for social mobility, but whenever somebody achieves this they are rewarded with the removal of almost half their income, and yet there are many who want to increase this further! Quite frankly it’s a disgrace! We should all be ashamed as a country! I’d also like to point out that paying the 45% additional tax bracket doesn’t by any means make you wealthy. £150,000 a year might sound like a lot, but in reality it isn’t, particularly if you live in the south (and let’s face it, that’s the only place that money is really obtainable, at least in the form of a salary). remember that £150,000 is deceptive. Because of aggressive income tax it’s actually more like £70,000. Combine that with high costs for commuting, high prices for food at lunch, high house prices, the inevitable working class snobbery that comes with anything over £50,000 and suddenly the money doesn’t seem all the amazing anymore.

            Anyway, my point is, I can’t see why people think it is “fair” to take from people who work hard to earn what they have so they can try to give their family a decent standard of living, and give it to people who clearly didn’t work as hard as they should have early on to get themselves a good education or to work hard, learn a trade a maybe start their own small business. Everybody now In Britain seems to think they are owed something, and if they are poor it is only the fault of those rich pigs who actually worked hard over their life yo earn what they have, rather than realise it was their fault for slacking off at school or not bothering to learn a useful skill etc. I’d like to make it perfectly clear, nobody owes YOU anything, you are not entitled to anything, you do not deserve anything. YOU owe YOURSELF to do what’s best for your family by working hard and getting a good income for your family. That might sound harsh, but it’s true, and I also think it’s fair as well.

            There is nothing stopping you from achieving a great standard of living for yourself and your family, no matter where you come from, even if it is from one of the poorest areas in the country. Even if you let slip your chance of getting a good education, that doesn’t mean you should be resigned to a life on benefits, some of the most successful people seemingly have nothing going for them, except that they are determined and hard working.

            So my advice is stop complaining about how poor you are and how rich they are and that they should give more money to you, make yourself wealthy, only you can do it after all.

          • slepkane

            Are you quite young? It really sounds like you haven’t had any experience of this at all. “There is nothing stopping you from achieving a great standard of living
            for yourself and your family, no matter where you come from.” Well, ideally, but only if the work pays. The rich are rich because of the work of the less rich, and they benefit most from the infrastructures we all pay for - roads, security, clean water. The strongest economies are and have always been the ones where everyone can afford stuff.

        • Grichlea

          And the Tories were so prescient that they pledged to match Labour’s spending plans 2007, just before the crash.

        • imkaisersoze


          Not only are you a cunt, but an ignorant cunt for believing lied and spin without bothering to do any fact checking. And the rich only pay the largest share of INCOME TAX proportional to their numbers, NOT total tax, the burden of which is shouldered by the many who do so without threatening to leave the fucking country.
          Osbourne has already famously been slapped on the wrists for making comparisons to the UK with Greece and the Greeks are a famous example of how austerity only destroys an economy.
          Currently the UK like most of the rest of the developed world enjoys record low borrowing rates, not due to austerity but the implicit backing of the boe. Other countries have similar cheap rates without austerity.
          It is criminally negligent that the Tories are not using this opportunity to reinvest with these cheap rates whilst the margin in returns would be extremely beneficial to the state and population. Why aren’t they investing? Because CUNTS like you are so ignorant that you repeat their simplistic lies verbatim everyday. You have outsourced your critical faculties to the daily mail and the proven liars in the Tory party. Shame on you.
          Finally hep per capita look it up, compared to our competitors and from 2007-2012. We inherited a growing economy from labour, which would pay the deficit down, but ideological austerity was inflicted due to the Greece justification later proven as a lie. Growth stalled and we lost out on years of growth whilst our rivals continued growing. I will post graphs when I have access to my pc.

      • jgm2

        Global Financial Crisis?

        Is that the one that started in Ireland? And then moved to America? And then the UK? And then Spain? All countries that, entirely coincidentally, had a massive housing boom and massive public sector spending in the years before it turned out that such an economy couldn’t last forever?

    • Simon Glass

      You sound like a fairly rabid adherent of the austerian cult, so may I suggest a bit of bedtime reading: http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion

    • Autoclub

      Who’s the naïve one here? The Tories borrowed more in the last term of parliament that Labour did in it’s entire history. Britain was in debt up to its eyeballs after WW2 yet we still managed to grow our way out of it. Austerity doesn’t work, only through growth and investment can we generate the taxation required to run the country.

      I work hard and live within my means, thankfully being Scottish I can see some returns for my tax payments. My daughter and nephew have both just finished uni without a £30k millstone hanging around their necks. My parents who both paid into this country all their lives will have the medicine and healthcare that they deserve.

      The only way to get this country out of the mire is to start hunting the real tax dodgers and stop vilifying the poorest and least able to defend themselves.

      £40bn was paid out in bankers bonuses last year, £150bn missing through corporate tax loops and you think you have any idea about economics.

      I wont end this by calling you a cunt, but I will by calling you a stupid cunt!

      • AF

        Funny that the Tories built up so much debt isn’t it? Didn’t think for a minute that it might be because the economy was so screwed it wouldn’t stop overnight did you? Wake up.

        • Jon Stone

          You wake up. The recovery was on its best course in the six months before the 2010 election, before the Tories spun their fairy tale excuse to suck the liquidity out of the system and stall the whole thing. They risked a second recession in order to pursue a wholly ideologically driven agenda: the shrinkage of the state and the privatisation of huge chunks of infrastructure.

          The idea that austerity was necessary, or even effective, is complete horseshit.

        • slepkane
    • Grichlea

      Er, I think you will find that a) all of that debt was due to bailing out the banks, and, b) the Conservatives have created as much debt since 2010 than all Labour governments combined. http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2014/06/17/the-coalition-will-leave-more-debt-than-all-labour-governmen

      • AF

        Funny that the Tories built up so much debt isn’t it? Didn’t think for a
        minute that it might be because the economy was so screwed it wouldn’t
        stop overnight did you? Wake up. It’s not going to get better that quickly.

    • Warren Davies

      yeah you are a cunt!

    • Alan Martin

      Wow, you bought the whole package, admirable that one person can swallow so much bullshit, what about the rather inconvenient fact that Osbourne has borrowed more in five years than all previous Labour govts added together?

    • ogre28

      I agree, it is immoral not to be fiscally responsible. Labour undermined themselves in the previous government with some poor choices, and the team that led the campaign still had deep ties to the old order. The problem with your assertions are that we do not live in a two party system and there were other choices. Conservatives have a number of very objectionable views on personal freedoms, on equality, and on welfare that despite my understanding of the importance of our economy means I could never vote for them. It does baffle me how anyone could support a party that gets 25% of the total available voters and then goes on to believe this gives them a mandate. This is authoritarian rule. An election that was purchased through vested interests targeting specific swing voters and undermining democracy. They did not openly battle other parties on the issues, they tried to make the issues about nationalism and tribalism. Continued support of a party that operates for a minority of the population is very dangerous, and they will never make any changes to make our country more democratic as it will hurt their ability to rule.

    • Faff

      OK cunt, time for some facts. In 1997, Labour inherited a budget deficit of 3.9%. By 2008 this had fallen to 2.1% (Wherefore overspending, wherefore your bullshit narrative about economic sense?) Following the collapse of Lehman Brothers, leading to the swift erosion of almost £10 trillion of market capital globally, the budget deficit rose to 7.7% (the figure at the time of the election). The increase in debt combined with the contraction in GDP is what caused the rise in the budget deficit. At least this is the view of the IMF, IFS and OECD. I realise the Daily Mail has a different perspective but that’s because its a paper targeted at drooling simpletons who don’t understand that economic data is a couple of clicks away on a search engine. They rely on fuckwits like you lapping up their lies and being too FUCKING LAZY to do even the most basic research. You fucking cunt.

    • ElliotCcc

      So I’m entitled to call you a moronic jizzrag, because the Conservative Coalition not only DOUBLED our national debt in just five years, but they also doubles the wealth of the top 1%.

      Self serving? Absolutely. Immoral? Precisely.

    • grne

      I’m not sure she mentioned Labour at any point in the article mate. If Labour were Labour truly, I’d like to believe they’d be voted in. In reality they offered the best alternative to get you lot out and hopefully this loss will cause them to rethink things and return stronger for the people who actually depend on them and also those of us who struggle to accept that a mindset such as yours exists.

      I don’t know about you personally, but too many people, from my own experiences usually Conservative supporters, are too quick in their condemnation of Russell Brand and others alike. Watch his stuff and you can’t really argue against it, unless you’re a cunt of course.

    • Alison Piearcey

      Where did you get the idea that the Tories were ‘paying down the deficit’? George Osborne borrowed more in 5 years than Labour did in 13! After all, that champers doesn’t come cheap, and all those tax cuts have to come from somewhere.

    • Charles Windsor

      How ironic - being called a cunt by miss Allotta-Fagina.

      Sorry Ruby, you are the cunt.

      A big fat stupid, childish, petulant bigoted cunt.
      Don’t think that voting for a party that pretends to care more about “ordinary people” makes you any less of a cunt.

      I hope you don’t mind me saying that, it’s just a statement of objective truth after all.

    • Tony Montana

      Who are you yes torys are cunts not because of the cuts its there fucking snobbery i kill snobs for fun get a life wanker

    • easynow

      you have no idea what the financial crisis was do you dumbass!!!!!!!!!! tory cunt go suck a fukin lemon
      tories against printing of money to pay of the defecit yet all the money they printed of for the banks, (quanative easing) when they went bust, now there coming to sell them are going to use the money to pay of the defecit what the fuck hypicrtical nonsense cunts!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ps. labour are bellends aswell as are most of the british population bumb fucks to interested in joey Essex then real things that matter fuck you all bunch of cunts!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • IQdaRadical Thinker

      That having been said, you’re still a cunt, and what’s worse, you’re a cunt who thinks they’re smart, which now makes you an annoying, delusional stupid cunt.

    • Gavin Morris

      Read it all. You’re an idiot and a cunt.

    • No Miss

      The 1.3 trillion debt we have is due to the middle class spending out on credit cards and demanding too much from housing.

      In fact, it was the middle classes who argued an end to laws that limited rentable value of a property. The solution was to ditch fair rent tribunals, thin out home information packs and remove the legal ability to sue if you’ve been sold a dud. That’s not bankers, that’s not big nasty politicians, but the collective effect of the middle classes.

      The problem this has caused is driving people to suicide. On top of this the problem is being blamed on this sector of people and not the actual group of people who collectively caused the problem

    • http://asystemofrandomtangents.wordpress.com/ Anna Helen Johnstone

      You DO know that pensions were paid by the pensioners of today over decades of hard work on low incomes, right? They should not be tied in with the rest of the welfare pot, and nor should those lifetime contributions be swindled away from them by people like you who can’t see past their own reflection.

    • mike hamblett

      Selfish c*nt!

    • trev


  • Jimm

    Imagine a country with a weak economy was left wing. Would they have any welfare, or any public health service? No, because they don’t have the money. You need a strong economy before you can start to help the poor, disabled and elderly (which I agree is very important). The UK Debt is £1560000000000. This is 82% of our GDP. We are acting like a irresponsible teenager with a credit card, and we need to cut back on our spending.

    Money doesn’t grow on trees, nothing is free in this world.

  • Tory Til I Die

    This kind of article makes me proud to be a cunt when left wing vitriolic abuse continues like this.
    Long may this kind of flagrant social division, wrapped up in a layer of “self-righteous”, left-wing revolutionary “activism” remain on the fringes of our society. I have no problems with standing up for those less privileged in society, I just see the way to do that differently.
    Yours truly,
    One Smug Cunt

  • Worktogetherchildren

    I think its funny people actually believe that the last government did Anything for economic recovery, shows how people sick in media.. Its so easy to skew figures.. I’m not a fan of Labour either.. Someone needs to get a proper government together in the future, why on earth do cuts need to come out of the nhs its a fact that they are already understaffed. Make companies have to hire employees, zero hour contracts might be good for some but some of the most vulnerable may get a call in the morning saying hey we don’t need you in today or Thursday after (they wont get paid) This results in food banks or people quitting their jobs and going on welfare for fear of starving. Stop calling each other cunts, the divide in society is becoming Victorian everyone should be working together and caring about this less well off than them and the government should be working in everyone’s interests. (I don’t think reintroducing fox hunting and lowering inheritance tax are policies for England’s benefit, we should probably be focussing on the important things such as employment, child poverty, economy, education and making the middle class see more of their hard earned money. All of these issues can be addressed together, if you cut too much from the poor then you will inevitably create slums around England.

    • MB

      “Make companies have to hire employees” How? Some companies can’t afford to hire more employees, how do you suggest the government makes them? Cut taxes for these companies and they will be able to employ more people. But cut taxes and left-wingers scream to bloody murder because the government is helping out companies instead of spending all the Nation’s money on more benefits. Treat the problem at its roots, not the symptoms.

      • Ur a fool

        No actually cutting tax got a company does not make them hire more employees. Actually ask anyone who runs a company, hiring is a last resort. It is expensive and after all they are running a business. Hiring is only dictated by demand. If you can sell more you need more people to sell it, FACT. Demand is driven by more people being able to buy, e.g. A wealthy and large middle class. Therefore the idea that not taxing businesses as much stimulates growth is absolutely ridiculous.

        • AC

          Calm down. Which comes first? You can’t create more demand if the jobs aren’t there to give people money in their pockets…

  • Neil Mahapatra

    Seems the Tories aren’t the only ones who are complete **** too. There’s an article next to this one on the Stepford website about how the left is becoming everybody they despise. It is a PHENOMENAL, balanced, article and any Tory I think would be happy to work with someone from the left who thinks like that.

    This article, however, is very much the opposite. Talentless, poorly thought out, and offensive. Nobody deserves to be treated without respect, even on the assumption that leftist socialist/economic business models work and serve the less fortunate more effectively (it’s not true anyway). But they again, poor thought and general lack of talent seems to run in the family.

    And then there’s this - how can the right be ****s then the left do this?


  • Tories won deal with it

    You sound like a bit of a cunt

  • Bogging

    Come back in 20 years when you’ve actually had a job and lived for longer than a domestic cat. Maybe then you’ll have a greater understanding of the realities of life. You are the worst type of bigot…one who is completely oblivious to the fact.

    Oh and repeatedly using the word “cunt” reinforces the fact that you are like a child, showing off to their friends in the playground. Well done you. Have a sticker.

  • http://my.telegraph.co.uk/voteregime/ The Prez

    The left loves democracy. Right up until the moment you don’t get the result you want.
    You lost. Deal with it.

    • starvingbutstillworking

      Democracy extends to protest. deal with it.

      • http://my.telegraph.co.uk/voteregime/ The Prez

        Oh, I’m trying. But the whining is becoming unbearable. Still, wouldn’t try and take away your right to protest against democracy if that’s what you want to do

  • Susan De Nimes

    “In fact, if anyone’s blind, it’s probably a load of white, cis, middle class guys telling the world it’s actually going to be all right, and that the Tories aren’t neglecting those at the bottom. When have they ever seen what it’s like at the bottom?”

    I hate to play this card, but you’re the daughter of a well-known successful author/journalist. When the fuck have you ever seen what it’s like at the bottom?
    (And this is coming from somebody not born in London from an economically deprived area of the country)

  • Bob

    This article is ill-informed, naive, and, worst of all, badly written. Your grammar is appalling: learn to use prepositions, and get a clue.

  • Elliott Mower

    I am a Labour supporter but I think this article was very poorly written and is such a big generalisation

    To say conservatives are purely neglecting the poor is like saying
    labour solely want to rob people who worked hard for their money (that
    is not to say that all conservative supporters work hard for their
    money). It is just as unfair to take someone’s hard earned money away
    from them just as it is not giving it to the needy. We should have a
    choice on how we spend our money (except for the necessary taxes). There really is no right, but obviously the richer will want to keep their money, we’re either ‘robbing’ or ‘depriving’ people.

    It really comes across as you having not known about the specific policies and manifesto’s of this years election. Rather you have just used general ideas associated with the party

  • liam

    Its immoral to screw over the next generation by miring them im debt just to satisfy some self-congratulatory champagne-socialist chufties

  • Marcus Dickson


    The intentions of conservative policies and the parameters by which they should be judged to have succeeded or not are wildly misunderstood by most of the electorate it would seem including those who vote tory. In the many angry emotive articles written by political hipster Facebook warriors not once have i seen a meaningful debate on the neoclassical/ keynesian economic viewpoint which is the central disagreement between those of a ‘left’ or ‘right’ position. Instead people spout pseudo-economics taken from biased articles designed to try and emotively push the reader through extreme use of hyperbole to agree with whatever they have to say. Phrases like ‘trickle down doesn’t work” and “austerity is negatively correlated with growth” highlight the gap in economic understanding, and provides a clue as to why those who would vote labour, should be so quick to label those who voted tory as ‘evil’ ‘immoral’ terrible people. Do we really think that it is all a massive conspiracy! The rich just want everyone to suffer, they’ve got bored of being privileged and it has turned them into sadistic dictators who want nothing more but to cripple the country from within, oh how that will suit them, when our health system turns to shit. LOL. If trickle down didn’t work then those at the bottom of society would have the same living standards as those at the beginning of time, there would be no such thing as growth, in fact the rich wouldn’t even have become rich because how would there have been anything for them to get rich off. The real and far more contentious issue is what is more important, to increase base level living standards, or to decrease inequality.

    The problem is, the government spending labour sanctioned under tony blair and gordon brown, although keeping growth at a steady on target 3%. Also increased the likelyhood of families having more children and enticed immigrants to want to come to England. I AM NO RACIST. I DO NOT SUPPORT UKIP AND HAVE NEVER ATTENDED A BNP OR EDL MARCH. because of immigrants (like it or not) and increasing birth rate, the population was growing very fast and this coupled with the high inflation, inevitable when pumping borrowed money into an economy the living standards for the lowest echelons of society would continue to drop in this time. LABOUR WERE LIKE FUCK BUT WE PROMISED THESE GUYS MORE EQUALITY, FUCK LETS SPEND MORE. The immigrants were actually one of the few good things going on here studies have shown people from abroad are often far more productive than english workers (probably due to not having all this government spending to back them up in terms of healthcare and welfare) they also filled vital holes in the labour supply. A well know stereotype (but actually true) is polish plumbers. These holes were due to university tuition fees being far lower meaning everyone who wanted to could go to university. THIS SOUNDS GREAT. WERE ALL GONNA BE FUCKING CLEVER RIGHT. I’m in my first year at university, Its piss easy and a right laugh and easier than school life even before gcses we just get drunk and stoned everyday. And I go to one of the top five universities in the country so think of how many crazy nights id be able to blow all my student loan on if i did fashion btec at greater blackpool met.

    ANYWAY. if these tories are such uptight wanker cunts trying to strangle the last breath out of the dying child that is the youth and underprivileged in modern day britain. Why are they doing so with cuts? Our American cousins have a far more maleficent human rights record, a far worse problem with racist and sexual discrimination, and have one of the highest homicide rates on the planet, and there spending lots of money they don’t necessarily have. IF WE WANT TO BE EVIL CUNTS WHY CANT WE DO IT RIGHT LIKE THEM.

    Maybe theres actually something else going on her. Austerity is no ‘quick fix’ solution, no one in government expected it to drag us out of the recession quickly, no one expected us to outgrow countries using fiscal injections. Austerity is obviously correlated with negative growth because it is contractionary fiscal policy, when you raise taxes and and make cuts your directly lessening gdp. But who cares when any illusory gdp growth we would have would simply get us into higher debts and cause less benefit than it was perceived to.

    The tories policies aim to make the country stronger through affecting the NAIRU and the levels of structural unemployment there is within our country, higher minimum wages as many alternative voters would call for would increase unemployment as firms were forced to make workers redundant. And in reality more poor people would be worse off. I hate to say it but the electorate is under the illusion that money grows on trees and that just because for a temporary period of time living standards for the poorest under labour were far better, that extravagance then has fucked over the underprivileged for at least one generation.

    The tragedy, it is blamed on the tories because economics is a long term phenomenon you cannot neccesarily match one governments input with the economic conditions of that time. Those who vote conservative arguably have the underprivileged interests more in mind than those who vote labour, so i refuse to be called a cunt.

  • Not a Tory!

    Why does the few who have to suffer now so that the many many suffering later have to be disabled and the poorest?
    Why do you Tory voter choose that the hard conversation and acceptance has to be had with the poorest and most vulnerable and not the richest?
    Yes we should address the deficit and we should be balancing books but has anyone had the hard conversation with a Tory that say sorry bud but you might have to pay a bit more tax or you know SOME tax if you want to live in our country?
    That to me seems like a much easier conversation to have than….. Sorry disabled people and poor working family but get out your house it is taking up valuable space that my rich friends who do t pay tax could be filling.
    What is that you have no food? Well good chap get a job!! You have one? Well then you are lucky aren’t you send my thank you card in the post I made that job possible.
    It’s all about who you think deserves the help and Tory voters always believe it is the rich because rich = success.

  • gotsda .

    Shut the fuck up you cunt.

    You clearly don’t understand that people voted Tory because the other options pretty much screamed irresponsible spending. I mean as if we don’t want to waste money on interest payments. As if.

  • gotsda .

    Correct, you have the right to call me a cunt.

    But it proves the point that many on the left are just simply uninterested in rational discourse, instead trying to demonised and illegitimise the politics of their oppositions. It’s not just that we’re wrong, we’re evil.

    You know, they had people like you in the USSR. Commissars were effectively thought police, and so are you, only you’re scarier because you are a grass roots version.

  • Andy Millen

    Dear leftard Student cunt. Yes, I call you a cunt. No, I’m not a Tory voter. But you need to get out into the real world where you work for a living for a few years. Then I will maybe listen to what you have to say. This is the real world and leftie cunts like you need to wake up.
    Yes you ‘re a student double barrelled hypocrite lefty cunt.

  • Tom Rose

    This article doesn’t make any sense to me. You are saying ‘I’m calling you a cunt because of your politics’, but then citing a load of political policies.
    In my view (I am a labour voter by the way) you can hate an idea but you don’t have to hate the person.
    It just seems a little like a prejudice to me.

    • Elliott Mower

      Completely agree with this comment. This article generalises too much looking at the basic assumptions of the Conservative party and does not show any awareness for the real issues surrounding politics.

      I’m a Labour voter as well but if all Labour members were like this I would definitely not vote for them

  • Mandalore_15

    As someone who considers himself centre-left, I long for the day when the lefties of our generation will get beyond the divisive, hateful rhetoric that is starting to permeate everything they do, and start doing something that is actually effective at getting shit done.

    Admittedly the author had an uphill struggle in winning me over with this article, but the “white cis male” bashing in paragraph 5 was the final nail. So here’s a thought: how about instead of being a self-righteous, moralising idiot, you start to think of a way in which you could engage with Tory voters and convince them around to your way of thinking?

    The idea that everyone who voted Tory did so for “selfish” reasons is laughable for two reasons:

    1. EVERYONE votes for selfish reasons… you vote for a party either because it will benefit you directly or it will help to create the society that you want to live in. Ain’t nobody voting purely altruistically, it just doesn’t happen.

    2. Your argument seems to be that most of the people who voted Tory are privileged, middle-to-upper class people who want to hoard their wealth and make the poor suffer. Examining the constituencies where the Tories won, this can’t possibly be true. No, the reason they won is because POOR PEOPLE VOTED FOR THEM (yes you read that correctly), and the reason they did that is because the Tories were able to market themselves - rightly or wrongly - as the party of ASPIRATION. Where Labour were all about not letting the working class slip through the cracks, the Tories were selling people the rather American dream of working themselves out of it and up to the middle.

    So yeah, voting Tory… misguided: most likely. Against your interests: almost definitely. But factoring in that most people won’t have the average university student’s level of political education, it’s understandable that they would buy into the sales pitch. The way to beat that isn’t by calling these people “selfish cunts”, but by showing them an attractive alternative and demonstrating why the Tories aren’t really going to look out for them.

  • Jemima

    You sound like a trainee Laurie Penny, reacting against fictions you’ve projected on your bedroom wall.

    Not a good place to be.

    Get help.

  • On the other hand

    Ah, how lovely, another open-minded, vitriol-free post from the left. Had you possibly considered that not all the 11 million people who voted conservative are greedy bankers or top 1%ers, but some might just think they have the best long-term outlook for the country.

    Personally, I would love to increase public spending during recession with infrastructure projects, but that only works if you pay off debts and save when the economy is good, and labour fucked that up before the banking crash started with rising expenditure as a proportion of GDP.

    As it is, we spent £53 billion last year paying interest on our national debt, so while it would be lovely to increase benefits and just ignore that, that just leads to spiralling debts which you then either need an even more painful correction to pay off, or you end up looking like Greece.

    So yes, you can call me a cunt, but that doesn’t make you right, or better than me, or invalidate the views of the millions who voted against your wishes. Sorry.

  • Sigh….

    It’s 2015 - do people STILL think it’s okay to use gendered insults?

  • Nathan

    Educate yourself. Miliband wanted to lower tuition fees to 6000, against the advice of people who can actually add up. This would only have helped richer students. He was either inept or a c###

  • Kim

    I wouldn’t say cunts - there’s loadsa guid cunts around - I’d say selfish eejits or just plan foolish. I’m just baffled by how many are trotting out ‘labour had a deficit’ (worldwide banking crisis was Labour’s fault?!), we need to ‘balance the books’ (absolutely nothing to do with international finance planning and everything to do with neo-liberal ideologies) - are they genuinely so stupid they think you run a country on the same lines as a household budget? The tories reduced our credit rating from triple a (seriously expensive) and are threatening to pull out of the EU (incredibly de-stabilising) yet somehow are considered solid financially? I’d like another banking crisis but without Gordon Brown saving them - this time they’ll have Osborne failing to find anyone to take his calls

  • Poe Face

    haha as a tory voter i thought the last line was quite funny. But I object to anyone who voted being called a cunt regardless of policies. The real cunts are the ones who didn’t take advantage of their right to vote.

  • AngryShortPerson

    Regardless of your political opinion, defacing a war memorial and assaulting police officers in an unscheduled protest is unacceptable. I have lost any sympathy for labor voters purely because of the actions of a minority. In my opinion, the true ‘cunts’ are not the voters of the current government, or those in office, but the sore looser sat outside.
    (NB: I speak as a non-tory voter)

  • Cheska Alice Rycraft

    Why all this hating on black labs? :(

  • Student

    I think your argument would be fair enough if the media was unbiased and Tory policies were reported for what they were. But it’s not, and many Tory voters from all classes do have genuine belief that the cuts are necessary and the Torys do not discriminate against the poor.

  • my teams red but I voted blue

    You have every right to call me a cunt. In the same way I have ever right to call you one back. Luckily, clever (or often non-clever) posts in social media circles don’t win elections

    Getting off your arse, canvassing and well thought out plans do.

    Maybe you’ll recognise this next time, rather then thinking that just because you, and a couple of mates are of the same opinion, that your all fucking right!

    Too right I’m sick of the scroungers, all these people who know their rights, but have forgotten their responsibilities! Like workino, paying tax, actually doing something meaningful!

    It’s become so boring with the Tory bashing that it’ll get to a point where people will stop listening….. which is perfect for the hardworking, young family’s, like mine…

    Jog on, cunt

  • Fiona Gregory

    I think Ruby is correct. I would just use tory as an insult word from now on, instead of the others I used to use before May 7th.

  • Trevor Hopkins

    To all those whom seek to justify or defend the actions of
    the political elite, please take a tube train away from planet cuckoo land and
    visit the real World for a day. You will most certainly be shocked at what you
    may find. If you wish to find true care, compassion, loyalty, reason, truth,
    empathy, non-judgment, ethics etc. etc. proportionally you will find all of these
    traits far more abundant in what is deemed to be the lower ranks of society
    than the upper chambers of modern powers. I find myself truly blessed and privileged
    to be amongst the former and not the latter. Equal to this I brought up three
    children as a lone parent Father. I am also deeply in love with my partner who happens
    to be disabled and a wheelchair user. Uniquely my path has given me a life to
    witness true values and clearly see the differences between right and wrong or
    needs and wants etc. If you wish to see how well a governance you have then
    simply see how well it cares for the most venerable within its society, how much it
    seeks to understand, respect, and trust its people, its environment and its
    future for all. We all are guardians of what is around us, everything we do
    should be a respect for those that have been before whilst at the same time we
    insure we leave the strongest and best foundations for those that follow. The
    search should be for the best for all not a privilege for just a present few.
    For those that are upset by certain language that is shown here. Historically
    the true meaning of the word Cunt is very ancient and can be translated to mean
    “Sacred Cave”. The word vagina can be attributed to the Romanic times and
    translated to a “Sheaf to place my Sword”. So in the ancient ways of understanding those
    with selected sight of truth would not be called cunts. However, when the said
    people do not learn from their day trip away from the Cuckoo planet, which
    obviously those that walk the halls of power have not, then yes in the modern terminology
    and usage of the expression they truly are nothing but a bunch of cunts!!!

    • John


  • Paul

    Dear Ruby,

    Yes, you are free to call me a “cunt” all you like; It is your right and I stand by it. I think, however, I need to share something important with you. I am completely immune to insults, but I am not immune to a well reasoned debate.

    Having spent six years in the military, “cunt” is actually something squaddies call each other as a term of endearment. I then spent five years in a police control centre, taking phonecalls at all times of the day and week which regularly resulted in me being called a “cunt” because I wouldn’t send police to a nightclub so some drunken idiot could get a refund after being chucked out.

    Instead of being abusive and ranting in some agressive tone that only makes it clear you are upset about something, but not being clear about what, try writing a constructive argument why Labour (or Greens or Lib Dems etc) are better. How will Labour benefit the jobs market? How will they “save” the NHS? How will they look after the elderly?

    If you are the type of person that is found in left-leaning parties, I am glad you are in no way able to influence the government. Your rant repels people and will only make matters worse.

    P.S. I have voted Lib Dem in the past so I am open to persuasion, just not by idiots like you.

  • Stresemann

    If you replaced ‘Tory’ with ‘Jew’ you would think we were in Germany after the 1928 election with all this hatred being passed about. The conservatives got a majority and there is nothing you can do about it for the next five years. Get over yourselves and then hopefully you will be able to get over the result.

  • itzman

    Nice to see the Left Hate not Hope is still going strong

  • Xenophonos

    Your daddy would be so proud, if he wasn’t such a cunt himself; just like his daughter in fact.

  • acidneedle

    Oh dear, daddy’s going to be so proud, eh Ruby?

    I mean, you are the daughter of the weediest Guardian journalist in all of Guardian journalism, eh?

    Why not bugger off back to your £1.8m family home in Highgate?

  • TangoOnTheGrave

    I’m presuming the author is fine with being considered a parasitic, self-righteous statist who would have seen (yet more) tried, tested and failed economic policies inflicted upon the population and continued the immoral fiscal malpractice of all the current bevy of parties?

  • _buzz_

    As someone who knows you, I am embarrassed to read this Ruby. It is naive, badly written, and, at points, incredibly hypocritical. You are, however much you might want to protest it (and do), an incredibly privileged person, so forgive me if I don’t take your view on life at the bottom particularly seriously. If you’re looking for a job, I suggest the Tab, though I don’t think even they would go near this article. You’re a liability - a career in journalism doesn’t start with calling people ‘cunts’. Many of the points you were getting at were valid ones - I personally voted for Labour - but I don’t think calling people cunts and writing an ill-conceived and, quite frankly, stupid article, helps.

  • jgm2

    ‘It is immoral to kick disabled people out of their houses’

    I agree. That would be a bad thing. But kicking them out of our houses and supplying them with a smaller, cheaper one so that we can use our bigger one to house somebody else with a bigger family. Well, that’s just plain good sense.

  • No Man’s Land

    Four words: Rotherham and Mid Staffordshire. And while we’re at it have you managed to wash the blood of all those dead Iraqi babies off your hands?
    This article is a poor excuse for a polemic, but I suppose it has attracted a lot of comments. You are well on your way to being the Katie Hopkins of the student left.

  • Partner

    You are Tim Lott’s Daughter.

    God, no wonder he’s a depressive.

  • Partner

    “here is one compensation. I do enjoy killing them. Going through my daughter’s barnet every Sunday night with a nit comb – to the symphony of her screams as I rake a metal comb across her scalp – extracting the little blood-puffed creatures and squashing them gives me a modicum of revenge. But what I want to know is, when we can cure tuberculosis, why we can’t do anything about these little fuckers.”

    Obviously where she gets her language from. Keep the shampoo up!

  • Caractacus

    I love how this is written by someone with a double barrelled surname.

    Indeed she can call me a cunt for voting Tory if she chooses. Despite clearly showing no understanding of my personal reasons for doing so.

    But let’s have some equality here. Ruby - you’re a cunt too.

  • Michael Hester

    I am a Tory and I frequently strongly criticise left wing ideas and call them immoral, just as you do about Tory policies. However, unlike you I recognise that just because people hold different views to me, views I may think are both morally and factually wrong does NOT make them a bad person. I recognise that most of these people sincerely believe they are right and also believe that their views are the best thing for the country. I think it’s pathetic the way you personally attack right wing voters like me and think you can just assume we’re motivated by selfishness. By all means question my values but don’t assume that I don’t genuinely believe they are the best thing for the country. Oh and if you believe that left wing voters don’t also often vote out of self interest, think again. There is a reason public sector employees and benefit claimants vote for a party that will keep them in work and give them more money. I personally enjoy debating vigorously with those who have different opinions from me and I cannot understand people like you who want to just lock out any debate and scream about how evil your opponents are. My own father is left wing and we not only get on great in all other areas of life, we actively enjoy debating politics. Also a tip: nobody outside your narrow circle of fellow travellers is going to listen to your point of view and consider changing their mind as long as you demonise them as selfish and nasty for daring to disagree with them. I hope you have no ambitions to get involved in politics, because that is not how you win elections. You win by treating those who disagree with you with respect and presenting them with a coherent argument that makes them change their mind. From what you have said here, I don’t like you as a person, but it has nothing to do with your political beliefs.

  • Poo pants

    Labour supporters are a bunch of vile, insanely jealous, self-righteous shite that are interested in destroying Briatin via mass immigration and bankruptcy. They don’t care about working people just their own careers. The people saw these traitors for what they are… vermin.

  • JackJackson

    No-one wants to hurt disabled people you silly pleb. I know disabled people who voted right wing. Again, we have another angry, angsty, nasty, judgemental left wing lowlife sitting back and name calling. Get off your arse and volunteer. I’m right wing and work at a homeless shelter. I don’t need to go around proclaiming it to those around me, I just live and get on with things. What do you do? Nothing I bet. Sit back and moan about how the right wing are scum? The right wing are the do’ers of the world.

  • Alex Mason

    Why is being socially liberal deemed so right on and ok, but being economically liberal deemed cuntish?

    Ruby, you’re an unprincipled idiotic twat.

  • http://www.pearshapedcomedy.com Anthony Miller

    Well, you still can call someone a cunt online still as far as I can work out because the Olly Cromwell conviction under Section 127 was overturned on appeal.

  • Rob

    How about because a strong economy is the biggest single driver to improving the standards of living for everyone?

    A competitive free-market enables the amazing technological revolutions we have developed in the fields of healthcare and IT that have provided the vast improvements in the quality of care that can be shared with all via the NHS and other public service. Don’t think that improving the quality of life is simply about redistributing money from the top to the bottom. Money is an invented token of wealth. It is not the outcome. It does not magically improve people’s lives. It doesn’t have static value. It is the effective spending of money and what it can be spent on that enables an improved outcome. Taxing the top too much slows economy and slows evolution of new and improved technology that can make the fundamental differences to peoples lives.

    What exactly do you mean by “without any promise of an eventual redistribution”? Are you implying that the Conservative government is going to abolish all taxes?

    I feel this article sums-up rather-well why people decide to vote for the Conservative party over Labour and others. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100024522/michael-moore-and-the-unquestioning-self-righteousness-of-the-left/

    The notion that voting Conservative is exclusive of morals or empathy for those who may not be as well off is a ridiculous point of view. Where on earth does this notion come from “When have they ever seen what it’s like at the bottom?” Are you telling me out of the millions of people that vote Conservative, absolutely none are working class, absolutely none are unemployed, absolutely none have been bankrupt and worked their way back? The Conservative philosophy is to help people to help themselves.

  • Toad

    And I believe voting labour makes you even more of a cunt. I’m not explaining why because it takes too long on my phone. Corbyn is the economically farcical proof in the pudding. Cunt.

  • Jay Aurhtur Rank

    Yep bang on the money all tory voters are cunts .

  • Tony Fox

    Hey there “sensible student” you are an insensitive moronic cunt. Deal with it loser

  • mike hamblett

    Ruby - you’re a diamond!