I have said this many times before... The right-wing party in Democracies don't represent a middle-class agenda.
The conservative party follows trickle-down economics. Basically, make the richest richer, and "maybe" everyone else will benefit "if" the GDP increases.
Right-wing politicians campaign for low taxes - but the only people that benefit from the low tax policies are the rich.
VAT, for example, stays the same regardless of if it is a left or right-wing government for everyone else, but the richest 3% of course will have ways around this.
Lobbyists and Donors decide economic policies. It is economic authoritarianism, causing the middle class to shrink. The right-wing politicians fight for the agenda of the richest 3%- their paymasters.
It is purely about allowing the richest 3% of people to pay no tax, or follow any business compliance and regulations.
The order of the day is allowing mergers to reduce competition so that shareholders can maximise profit.
Also, outsourcing jobs to cheap countries once there is little competition because providing a service is less important because of reduced choice. (e.g. oligopoly)
If politics could be cleaned up by making it more transparent, it might revolutionise what is defined as left and right-wing.
For example, if political donations were capped, this would make politics more democratic.
It would be about the number of donations, not individual amounts by billionaires. (who either seek tax reductions or permission to merge companies and destroy competition).
That would remove the leverage that the richest have to select who makes up the conservative candidates.
People can only choose from the final candidates, and at present, the richest people decide who is on the shortlist.
It could mean that a conservative with a middle-class agenda could win on policies and beat the bribed slimeballs who win because of campaign donations.
If a middle-class conservative had a policy that tax will be reduced for everyone, just by ensuring the richest pay the same % of the tax.
Currently, the richest 3% own 97% of the wealth, but governments are not taxing this, or at a tiny % of what everyone else pays.
It is simple - tax the richest 3% the same % as everyone else, and then everyone pays less tax.
So it is a conservative agenda (Low tax is better for the economy) - but everyone gets the benefit of the policy
At the moment, voting for the conservative party is just voting for tax reductions for the rich.
This is what I don't understand about simpletons like DumbMike.
He constantly claims the left wing is corrupt, but if the right-wing campaigns for low taxes only for the rich, it is obvious they just represent the rich.
Why would a billionaire donate billions to select politicians that would increase taxes for them (e.g. a left-wing, or a middle-class conservative)?
If you were a billionaire that wanted tax reductions, of course, you would vote for what is currently referred to as the conservative party.
If it was a conservative middle-class agenda, then I could vote for them. I am more concerned about economics than ideology.
Ideology is subjective, but fraud and bribes are not.